{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,5,13]],"date-time":"2025-05-13T21:57:56Z","timestamp":1747173476727,"version":"3.40.5"},"reference-count":12,"publisher":"Cambridge University Press (CUP)","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2020,2,7]],"date-time":"2020-02-07T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1581033600000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":37,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Epidemiol. Infect."],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2020]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n\t  <jats:p>The practice of foodborne illness outbreak investigations has evolved, shifting away from large-scale community case-control studies towards more focused case exposure assessments and sub-cluster investigations to identify contaminated food sources. Criteria to include or exclude cases are established to increase the efficiency of epidemiological analyses and traceback activities, but these criteria can also affect the investigator's ability to implicate a suspected food vehicle. A 2010 outbreak of <jats:italic>Salmonella<\/jats:italic> ser. Hvittingfoss infections associated with a chain of quick-service restaurants (Chain A) provided a useful case study on the impact of exclusion criteria on the ability to identify a food vehicle. In the original investigation, a case-control study of restaurant-associated cases and well meal companions was conducted at the ingredient level to identify a suspected food vehicle; however, 21% of cases and 22% of well meal companions were excluded for eating at Chain A restaurants more than once during the outbreak. The objective of this study was to explore how this decision affected the results of the outbreak investigation.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1017\/s0950268820000138","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2020,2,7]],"date-time":"2020-02-07T02:20:55Z","timestamp":1581042055000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":2,"title":["Improving inclusion and exclusion criteria in foodborne illness outbreak investigations: a case study"],"prefix":"10.1017","volume":"148","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-2244-3729","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"M. J.","family":"Firestone","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"P.","family":"Lee","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"C. W.","family":"Hedberg","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"56","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2020,2,7]]},"reference":[{"key":"S0950268820000138_ref12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1017\/S095026880005737X"},{"key":"S0950268820000138_ref11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1017\/S0950268899002393"},{"key":"S0950268820000138_ref4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/oxfordjournals.epirev.a036137"},{"key":"S0950268820000138_ref6","unstructured":"Smith K (2015) Product Tracing in Epidemiologic Investigations of Outbreaks due to Commercially Distributed Food Items \u2013 Utility, Application, and Considerations. Available online: http:\/\/mnfoodsafetycoe.umn.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/Product-Tracing-in-Epidemiologic-Investigations.pdf."},{"volume-title":"Investigating Outbreaks","year":"2016","key":"S0950268820000138_ref3"},{"key":"S0950268820000138_ref2","unstructured":"Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2017) Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet): FoodNet 2015 Surveillance Report (Final Data). Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CDC. Available online: https:\/\/www.cdc.gov\/foodnet\/reports\/annual-reports-2015.html."},{"key":"S0950268820000138_ref1","unstructured":"Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2019) Surveillance for Foodborne Disease Outbreaks, United States, 2017, Annual Report. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CDC. Available online: https:\/\/www.cdc.gov\/fdoss\/pdf\/2017_FoodBorneOutbreaks_508.pdf."},{"key":"S0950268820000138_ref5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.4315\/0362-028X.JFP-19-077"},{"volume-title":"Economic Impact of Georgia Tomato Productions Value Losses Due to the US Salmonella Outbreak","year":"2008","author":"Flanders","key":"S0950268820000138_ref9"},{"volume-title":"Summary of S. ser Hvittingfoss Outbreak, April-June 2010","year":"2010","key":"S0950268820000138_ref7"},{"key":"S0950268820000138_ref8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.foodcont.2013.06.026"},{"key":"S0950268820000138_ref10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1089\/fpd.2016.2137"}],"container-title":["Epidemiology and Infection"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/services\/aop-cambridge-core\/content\/view\/S0950268820000138","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2020,2,7]],"date-time":"2020-02-07T02:21:00Z","timestamp":1581042060000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/product\/identifier\/S0950268820000138\/type\/journal_article"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2020]]},"references-count":12,"alternative-id":["S0950268820000138"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1017\/s0950268820000138","relation":{},"ISSN":["0950-2688","1469-4409"],"issn-type":[{"type":"print","value":"0950-2688"},{"type":"electronic","value":"1469-4409"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2020]]},"article-number":"e24"}}