Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41830508›Full record

ReviewComprehensive reviews in food science and food safety2026

Artificial Intelligence in Food Safety: A Tertiary Study.

Marina Arribas Lopez, Yamine Bouzembrak, Bedir Tekinerdogan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Marina Arribas LopezInformation Technology Group, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Yamine BouzembrakInformation Technology Group, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8028-0847
Bedir TekinerdoganInformation Technology Group, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Food safety remains a critical factor in preventing contaminated and hazardous products from reaching consumers. The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and its capacity to deal with vast datasets has significantly enhanced food safety protocols, and a substantial number of primary and secondary studies have emerged at the intersection of these two domains. Although several studies have addressed AI applications in food safety, no tertiary study has yet synthesized the collective insights from existing systematic reviews. To address this gap, this paper provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of AI applications in food safety through a systematic tertiary analysis of secondary studies. By systematically analyzing secondary studies, this research identifies key trends such as the food categories most frequently investigated, the data sources utilized, prevalent food safety hazards, the commonly adopted AI algorithms, and the challenges associated with their implementation within the field. The analysis revealed that dairy products received the greatest research attention, with sensing data serving as the primary data source. Neural networks emerged as the predominant AI approach. Furthermore, most applications focused on the detection of chemical food safety hazards rather than biological, physical, or general predictive modeling. Notably, this study highlights a lack of AI algorithms utilizing unstructured data, despite its growing relevance in the era of generative AI. Accordingly, future research directions are discussed, particularly the transformative potential of large language models (LLMs) in food safety monitoring and regulatory compliance.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceFood SafetyAlgorithmsFood ContaminationHumans

Identifiers

PMID41830508
PMCPMC12988573

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.