Tam Clarence C
Infectious Disease Epidemiology Unit, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Epidemiology. 2008 Mar;19(2):291-3. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e318163cc94.
Studies comparing incidence of foodborne illness among different population subgroups are complicated by biases inherent in routinely available data. Even when we account for these biases, our understanding of the epidemiology of foodborne illness is hampered by a lack of empirical evidence on how social and cultural factors influence risk, and how this risk is modified by the acquisition of immunity. An epidemiology of foodborne illness must include the epidemiology of food and the complex pathways by which it results in illness, as well as an understanding of the acquisition and prevalence of immunity to foodborne pathogens. Only then can we correctly interpret studies of incidence and risk factors, and their implications for control of foodborne illness.
比较不同人群亚组中食源性疾病发病率的研究因常规可得数据中固有的偏差而变得复杂。即使我们考虑了这些偏差,由于缺乏关于社会和文化因素如何影响风险以及这种风险如何因获得免疫力而改变的实证证据,我们对食源性疾病流行病学的理解仍受到阻碍。食源性疾病的流行病学必须包括食物的流行病学以及食物导致疾病的复杂途径,同时还需了解对食源性病原体免疫力的获得情况和流行程度。只有这样,我们才能正确解释发病率和风险因素的研究及其对食源性疾病控制的意义。