Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Are food exposures obtained through commercial market panels representative of the general population? Implications for outbreak investigations

  • T. Inns (a1) (a2) (a3), D. Curtis (a1), P. Crook (a1), R. Vivancos (a1) (a2) (a4), D. Gardiner (a1), N. McCarthy (a2) (a5) and P. Mook (a1) (a5)...

Abstract

Current methods of control recruitment for case-control studies can be slow (a particular issue for outbreak investigations), resource-intensive and subject to a range of biases. Commercial market panels are a potential source of rapidly recruited controls. Our study evaluated food exposure data from these panel controls, compared with an established reference dataset. Market panel data were collected from two companies using retrospective internet-based surveys; these were compared with reference data from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS). We used logistic regression to calculate adjusted odds ratios to compare exposure to each of the 71 food items between the market panel and NDNS participants. We compared 2103 panel controls with 2696 reference participants. Adjusted for socio-demographic factors, exposure to 90% of foods was statistically different between both panels and the reference data. However, these differences were likely to be of limited practical importance for 89% of Panel A foods and 79% of Panel B foods. Market panel food exposures were comparable with reference data for common food exposures but more likely to be different for uncommon exposures. This approach should be considered for outbreak investigation, in conjunction with other considerations such as population at risk, timeliness of response and study resources.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Are food exposures obtained through commercial market panels representative of the general population? Implications for outbreak investigations
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Are food exposures obtained through commercial market panels representative of the general population? Implications for outbreak investigations
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Are food exposures obtained through commercial market panels representative of the general population? Implications for outbreak investigations
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

Author for correspondence: T. Inns, E-mail: thomas.inns@liverpool.ac.uk

References

Hide All
1.Rothman, KJ, Greenland, S and Lash, TL (2012) Modern Epidemiology, 3rd Edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins.
2.Scheil, W et al. (1998) A South Australian Salmonella Mbandaka outbreak investigation using a database to select controls. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 22, 536539.
3.Friesema, IHM, van Gageldonk-Lafeber, AB and van Pelt, W (2015) Extension of traditional infectious disease surveillance with a repeated population survey. European Journal of Public Health 25, 130134.
4.Harker, KS et al. (2010) An outbreak of Salmonella Typhimurium DT191a associated with reptile feeder mice. Epidemiology and Infection 139, 12541261.
5.Inns, T et al. (2013) Outbreak of Salmonella enterica Goldcoast infection associated with whelk consumption, England, June to October 2013. Eurosurveillance 18, 20654.
6.Matulkova, P et al. (2012) Crab meat: a novel vehicle for E. coli O157 identified in an outbreak in South West England, August 2011. Epidemiology and Infection 141, 20432050.
7.Waldram, A et al. (2015) Control selection methods in recent case-control studies conducted as part of infectious disease outbreaks. European Journal of Epidemiology 30, 465471.
8.Buchholz, U et al. (2011) German outbreak of Escherichia coli O104:H4 associated with sprouts. New England Journal of Medicine 365, 17631770.
9.Rhodes, SD, Bowie, DA and Hergenrather, KC (2003) Collecting behavioural data using the world wide web: considerations for researchers. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 57, 6873.
10.van Gelder, MMHJ, Bretveld, RW and Roeleveld, N (2010) Web-based questionnaires: the future in epidemiology? American Journal of Epidemiology 172, 12921298.
11.Gillespie, IA et al. (2010) Listeria monocytogenes infection in the over-60s in England between 2005 and 2008: a retrospective case–control study utilizing market research panel data. Foodborne Pathogens and Disease 7, 13731379.
12.Mook, P et al. (2016) Selection of population controls for a Salmonella case-control study in the UK using a market research panel and web-survey provides time and resource savings. Epidemiology and Infection 144, 12201230.
13.Gobin, M et al. (2018) National outbreak of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli O157:H7 linked to mixed salad leaves, United Kingdom, 2016. Eurosurveillance 23, 1700197.
14.Kanagarajah, S et al. (2018) Whole genome sequencing reveals an outbreak of Salmonella Enteritidis associated with reptile feeder mice in the United Kingdom, 2012–2015. Food Microbiology 71, 3238.
15.Sinclair, C et al. (2016) Investigation of a national outbreak of STEC Escherichia coli O157 using online consumer panel control methods: Great Britain, October 2014. Epidemiology and Infection 145, 864871.
16.Yahata, Y et al. (2018) Web survey-based selection of controls for epidemiological analyses of a multi-prefectural outbreak of enterohaemorrhagic Escherichia coli O157 in Japan associated with consumption of self-grilled beef hanging tender. Epidemiology and Infection 146, 450457.
17.Mook, P et al. (2018) Online market research panel members as controls in case-control studies to investigate gastrointestinal disease outbreaks: early experiences and lessons learnt from the UK. Epidemiology and Infection 146, 458464.
18.Grimes, DA and Schulz, KF (2005) Compared to what? Finding controls for case-control studies. The Lancet 365, 14291433.
19.Whitton, C et al. (2011) National diet and nutrition survey: UK food consumption and nutrient intakes from the first year of the rolling programme and comparisons with previous surveys. The British Journal of Nutrition 106, 18991914.
20.NatCen Social Research MEWL, University College London. (2017) Medical School. National Diet and Nutrition Survey Years 1-6, 2008/09-2013/14. In: Service UD, ed. 8th Edition ed. UK Data Service. http://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-6533-7.
21.Gardiner, D et al. (2018) Use of an ingredient-based analysis to investigate a national outbreak of Escherichia coli O157, United Kingdom, July 2016. Eurosurveillance 23, 1700627.
22.Bland, MJ and Altman, DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. The Lancet 327, 307310.
23.R Core Team (2017) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
24.Viechtbauer, W (2010) Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software 36, 48.
25.Public Health England (2013) PHE Gastrointestinal Infections Data: Summary of eFOSS data. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/426019/eFOSS_surveillance_tables_for_Web.pdf.
26.Weigold, A, Weigold, IK and Russell, EJ (2013) Examination of the equivalence of self-report survey-based paper-and-pencil and internet data collection methods. Psychological Methods 18, 5370.
27.Baker, R et al. (2010) Research SynthesisAAPOR report on online panels. Public Opinion Quarterly 74, 711781.
28.Erens, B et al. (2014) Nonprobability web surveys to measure sexual behaviors and attitudes in the general population: a comparison with a probability sample interview survey. Journal of Medical Internet Research 16, e276.
29.Craig, MB et al. (2013) Comparison of US panel vendors for online surveys. Journal of Medical Internet Research 15, e260.
30.Hays, RD, Liu, H and Kapteyn, A (2015) Use of Internet panels to conduct surveys. Behavior Research Methods 47, 685690.

Keywords

Type Description Title
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Inns et al. supplementary material
Inns et al. supplementary material 1

 Unknown (23 KB)
23 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed