Brief Epidemiological Summary (Refer to section of guide noted in the column at left):

A.1

Has a line list been provided to investigative team members including Health Canada (e.g., case ID, case confirmation status, age, sex, onset, food exposure and purchase details)?

 [] Yes   [] No

A.2

Has an epidemiological summary been provided to investigative team members including Health Canada?

 [] Yes   [] No

A.3

Is there is substantial evidence that cases represent a common source outbreak?

Briefly describe the evidence indicating cases represent a common source outbreak:                                       

Food Under Assessment:

B.1

Suspect food:

B.2

Other levels of specificity if applicable/information available (e.g., common product details, purchase location, purchase dates, package type, brand, packager/distributor/manufacturer, lot code/best before date, etc.):

→

    →

        →

Epidemiological Assessment Criteria and Considerations

C.1

Plausibility:  The food is a plausible vehicle of infection.   

Provide supporting evidence:      

 [] Strong

 [] Moderate

 [] Weak

·         Is the food a known vehicle of infection for the outbreak pathogen?    

 [] Yes   [] No

·         Is there literature to indicate that the pathogen has been previously identified in the food type?     

 [] Yes   [] No

If yes to either of the above two questions, no further explanation is required.

If ‘No’ to both of the above questions, provide any available evidence in support of the food as a plausible vehicle of infection:

C.2

Temporality:  Cases report eating the food within their period of exposure.

Provide supporting evidence:

 [] Strong

 [] Moderate

 [] Weak

·         What was the time period used to assess case exposures during interviews?

_____________

·         Do any cases only report eating the suspect food outside of this time period?

 [] Yes   [] No 

If Yes, please explain.

C.3

Consistency:  The distribution of cases in time and place is consistent with the shelf-life and distribution of the food.

 Strong

 Moderate

 Weak

Provide supporting evidence:

C.4

Consistency:  The food exposure is consistently reported among cases.

 [] Strong

 [] Moderate

 [] Weak

Provide supporting evidence:

C.5

Strength of association:  A higher than expected proportion of cases report the food exposure.

Provide supporting evidence:

·         Has an analytical study been conducted?  

·         Do data exist that estimate the proportion of the general population who eat the food or similar foods (e.g., Foodbook, FoodNet Canada, FoodNet USA, other)?

 [] Strong

 [] Moderate

 [] Weak

 [] Yes   [] No

 [] Yes   [] No

If ‘Yes’, provide further details.  If ‘No’ provide any available evidence that suggests a higher than expected proportion of cases report the food exposure:

C.6

Consideration of alternate explanations:  Other plausible hypotheses have been adequately ruled out.

 [] Strong

 [] Moderate

 [] Weak

Provide supporting evidence:

Conclusion

D

Is there strong epidemiological evidence that [the suspect food] is [a/the] vehicle of infection for this outbreak?

[]  Yes           

[] Additional evidence needed

State any additional conclusions that can be made regarding specific details of the suspect food (e.g., product, purchase locations, purchase time periods, origin of the food):

Briefly highlight any important gaps in the evidence:

E

Additional considerations: