Can foodborne illness estimates from different countries be legitimately compared?: case study of rates in the UK compared with Australia, Canada and USA

Objective Mathematical models have gained traction when estimating cases of foodborne illness. Model structures vary due to differences in data availability. This begs the question as to whether differences in foodborne illness rates internationally are real or due to differences in modelling approa...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sarah O'Brien, Darren Holland, Nazmina Mahmoudzadeh, Robin Clifford, Guy Poppy, Zebulah Meredith, Harry Grantham-Hill
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMJ Publishing Group 2023-08-01
Series:BMJ Open Gastroenterology
Online Access:https://bmjopengastro.bmj.com/content/10/1/e001009.full
_version_ 1797371554547367936
author Sarah O'Brien
Darren Holland
Nazmina Mahmoudzadeh
Robin Clifford
Guy Poppy
Zebulah Meredith
Harry Grantham-Hill
author_facet Sarah O'Brien
Darren Holland
Nazmina Mahmoudzadeh
Robin Clifford
Guy Poppy
Zebulah Meredith
Harry Grantham-Hill
author_sort Sarah O'Brien
collection DOAJ
description Objective Mathematical models have gained traction when estimating cases of foodborne illness. Model structures vary due to differences in data availability. This begs the question as to whether differences in foodborne illness rates internationally are real or due to differences in modelling approaches.Difficulties in comparing illness rates have come into focus with COVID-19 infection rates being contrasted between countries. Furthermore, with post-EU Exit trade talks ongoing, being able to understand and compare foodborne illness rates internationally is a vital part of risk assessments related to trade in food commodities.Design We compared foodborne illness estimates for the United Kingdom (UK) with those from Australia, Canada and the USA. We then undertook sensitivity analysis, by recreating the mathematical models used in each country, to understand the impact of some of the key differences in approach and to enable more like-for-like comparisons.Results Published estimates of overall foodborne illness rates in the UK were lower than the other countries. However, when UK estimates were adjusted to a more like-for-like approach to the other countries, differences were smaller and often had overlapping credible intervals. When comparing rates by specific pathogens, there were fewer differences between countries. The few large differences found, such as virus rates in Canada, could at least partly be traced to methodological differences.Conclusion Foodborne illness estimation models are country specific, making international comparisons problematic. Some of the disparities in estimated rates between countries can be shown to be attributed to differences in methodology rather than real differences in risk.
first_indexed 2024-03-08T18:21:34Z
format Article
id doaj.art-515bd513e63646ccbf985d1013c57c59
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2054-4774
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-08T18:21:34Z
publishDate 2023-08-01
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format Article
series BMJ Open Gastroenterology
spelling doaj.art-515bd513e63646ccbf985d1013c57c592023-12-30T20:30:07ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open Gastroenterology2054-47742023-08-0110110.1136/bmjgast-2022-001009Can foodborne illness estimates from different countries be legitimately compared?: case study of rates in the UK compared with Australia, Canada and USASarah O'Brien0Darren Holland1Nazmina Mahmoudzadeh2Robin Clifford3Guy Poppy4Zebulah Meredith5Harry Grantham-Hill6Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UKFood Standards Agency, London, UKFood Standards Agency, London, UKFood Standards Agency, London, UKUniversity of Southampton, Southampton, Hampshire, UKFood Standards Agency, London, UKFood Standards Agency, London, UKObjective Mathematical models have gained traction when estimating cases of foodborne illness. Model structures vary due to differences in data availability. This begs the question as to whether differences in foodborne illness rates internationally are real or due to differences in modelling approaches.Difficulties in comparing illness rates have come into focus with COVID-19 infection rates being contrasted between countries. Furthermore, with post-EU Exit trade talks ongoing, being able to understand and compare foodborne illness rates internationally is a vital part of risk assessments related to trade in food commodities.Design We compared foodborne illness estimates for the United Kingdom (UK) with those from Australia, Canada and the USA. We then undertook sensitivity analysis, by recreating the mathematical models used in each country, to understand the impact of some of the key differences in approach and to enable more like-for-like comparisons.Results Published estimates of overall foodborne illness rates in the UK were lower than the other countries. However, when UK estimates were adjusted to a more like-for-like approach to the other countries, differences were smaller and often had overlapping credible intervals. When comparing rates by specific pathogens, there were fewer differences between countries. The few large differences found, such as virus rates in Canada, could at least partly be traced to methodological differences.Conclusion Foodborne illness estimation models are country specific, making international comparisons problematic. Some of the disparities in estimated rates between countries can be shown to be attributed to differences in methodology rather than real differences in risk.https://bmjopengastro.bmj.com/content/10/1/e001009.full
spellingShingle Sarah O'Brien
Darren Holland
Nazmina Mahmoudzadeh
Robin Clifford
Guy Poppy
Zebulah Meredith
Harry Grantham-Hill
Can foodborne illness estimates from different countries be legitimately compared?: case study of rates in the UK compared with Australia, Canada and USA
BMJ Open Gastroenterology
title Can foodborne illness estimates from different countries be legitimately compared?: case study of rates in the UK compared with Australia, Canada and USA
title_full Can foodborne illness estimates from different countries be legitimately compared?: case study of rates in the UK compared with Australia, Canada and USA
title_fullStr Can foodborne illness estimates from different countries be legitimately compared?: case study of rates in the UK compared with Australia, Canada and USA
title_full_unstemmed Can foodborne illness estimates from different countries be legitimately compared?: case study of rates in the UK compared with Australia, Canada and USA
title_short Can foodborne illness estimates from different countries be legitimately compared?: case study of rates in the UK compared with Australia, Canada and USA
title_sort can foodborne illness estimates from different countries be legitimately compared case study of rates in the uk compared with australia canada and usa
url https://bmjopengastro.bmj.com/content/10/1/e001009.full
work_keys_str_mv AT sarahobrien canfoodborneillnessestimatesfromdifferentcountriesbelegitimatelycomparedcasestudyofratesintheukcomparedwithaustraliacanadaandusa
AT darrenholland canfoodborneillnessestimatesfromdifferentcountriesbelegitimatelycomparedcasestudyofratesintheukcomparedwithaustraliacanadaandusa
AT nazminamahmoudzadeh canfoodborneillnessestimatesfromdifferentcountriesbelegitimatelycomparedcasestudyofratesintheukcomparedwithaustraliacanadaandusa
AT robinclifford canfoodborneillnessestimatesfromdifferentcountriesbelegitimatelycomparedcasestudyofratesintheukcomparedwithaustraliacanadaandusa
AT guypoppy canfoodborneillnessestimatesfromdifferentcountriesbelegitimatelycomparedcasestudyofratesintheukcomparedwithaustraliacanadaandusa
AT zebulahmeredith canfoodborneillnessestimatesfromdifferentcountriesbelegitimatelycomparedcasestudyofratesintheukcomparedwithaustraliacanadaandusa
AT harrygranthamhill canfoodborneillnessestimatesfromdifferentcountriesbelegitimatelycomparedcasestudyofratesintheukcomparedwithaustraliacanadaandusa