Evaluation Of The Bacterial Food Poisoning Forecasting Services

ObjectivesTo establish a more scientific and systematic evaluation tool, and to evaluate the benefit and effect of bacterial food poisoning forecasting service. To collect public and sensitive industries’reasonable Suggestions of bacterial food poisoning forecasting service. And then improve and promote the bacterial food poisoning forecasting services. Finally, we can provide demonstration for health related meteorological services.Methods1. Through reading the literatures in domestic and overseas to acquire the domestic and foreign evaluation tools, with the front-line forecasters’suggestions, we formed first draft of the scale. Bacterial food poisoning forecasting service evaluation questionnaires was revised after multidisciplinary team discussion and expert consultation and then its reliability and validity were tested.2. The qualified quantitative tools were used in the cross-sectional study. The data was descripted with frequency and Percent frequency distribution. the relationships between variables were further explained by using factor score and structural equation model analysis.Results1. The reliability and validity of the tools1.1Through careful consideration and analysis, combined with multidisciplinary team discussion and expert consultation, we finally established the tool with13items. And then compiling questionnaire aimed at public and sensitive industries.1.2The reliability and validity of the public scaleThe validity and reliability study showed that the Cronbach a was0.827, the average I-CVI was0.92; the EFA model showed that Bartlett was1868.264(P<0.05), KMOwas0.832, and all the factor loading were more than0.3except Item-1. The CFA model showed that x2/df=3.615. Other indexes of them were GFI (0.932), AGFI (0.890), NFI (0.917) and CFI (0.896). Each of them was about0.9. RMSEA were0.048which showed that the model’s fit of goodness were good when we delete Item-1. 1.3The reliability and validity of the industries scaleThe validity and reliability study showed that the Cronbach a was0.867, the average I-CVI was0.92,2/3of Items’ ICC were more than0.6, the minimum was0.43. It indicated the test-retest reliability of the tool was relatively high.2. Evaluation result2.1Public’s evaluation:1830questionnaires (1503validated questionnaires) were finished in nine CBD in Shanghai in encounter investigation way. There were757men and746women,1055people (70.7%) from18to40,884people (58.8%) of college degree or above.37.8percent of the people had a relatively high frequency of getting the service. Timeliness had no high scale by51.4%.35.7percent of people were putting on high concern on it. More than50percent of people had low opinion on the overall evaluation.37.2percent understanded the knowledge well after obtaining the service and almost53.2percent obeyed the rules. About45percent had a good idea on its social and economic benefits. The result of factor scale showed that the respectively scores of Service availability, Service awareness/satisfaction, Service compliance, Service effect were2.49±0.476,3.34±0.614,2.82±0.462,2.85±0.662. The four factors had statistical differences in the aspects of ages, the educational levels and jobs. The confirmatory structure model showed that Service accessibility had direct influence on Service attention/Satisfaction and Benefit and also indirect effect on Service compliance and Service effect. To improve service accessibility was the important step in promoting health related meteorological service indicators such as service compliance and health outcomes.2.2Industries’evaluation:124questionnaires (103validated questionnaires) were finished on the industries, which were supplied the service by short message, in One to one telephone interview way. They were all the large scale of chain restaurants which are ordinary restaurants, snack bars, hot-pot or Japanese restaurants and bento companies. There were84restaurants (81.6%) of them had relatively high frequency of getting the service. Timeliness had no high scale by only5%.64(72.7%) of them were putting on high concern on it.20percent of them had highly positive opinion and72.7percent relatively positive opinion on the overall evaluation. almost90percent obeyed the rules. The service made the incidence of food poisoning low which almost70percent of them considered. And56of them (63.6%) had a positive idea on its social and79(63.6%) on its economic benefits. More than60percent of them expected that the service contents and service project guides should be added and enriched.Conclusions and RecommendationsThere are four main factors in evaluation frame including Service availability, Service awareness/satisfaction, Service compliance, Service effect. The tools have been considered by high reliability and validity and then can be used to evaluate the bacterial food poisoning forecasting service.Although many ways spreading information, there are low frequency got the service by public. Almost half of public have no high degree of Satisfaction on the service. Six in ten are not putting on high concern on it. But they are high compliance ater reading the info. Meanwhile they think the service have high benefit on their life. So we need to improve the service by adding and enriching the content and expanding publicity.Sensitive industries have a high appraisal on Service availability, Service awareness/satisfaction, Service compliance, Service effect. But we were realized from the suggestions that the service have a great place to improve.