Table A13.
The data extraction form used during the study had the following fields.
| Field | Attributes |
|---|---|
| Authors | |
| Title | |
| Published | |
| Point in the food chain | Values: storage and feed, farm |
| Intervention category | Values: 1. Feed production, 1.1. High moisture (silage/haylage/pasture), 1.2. Silage additives, 1.3. Low moisture (legume hays/fodder/straw/hulls and shells), 2. Feed additives, 2.1. Technological additives, 2.1.1. Preservatives, 2.1.2. Acidity regulators, 2.1.3. Adsorbents, 2.1.3.1. Bentonites, 2.1.3.2. Silicates, 2.1.4. Enzymes, 2.1.4.1. Extracellular enzymes of Basidiomycota, 2.1.5. Microbes, 2.1.5.1. Lactic acid bacteria (Lactobacillus and others), 2.1.5.2. Yeasts (Saccharomyces and others), 2.1.5.3. Aspergillus, 2.1.5.4. Other microbes, 2.1.6. Plant-based absorbents (biosorbents), 2.1.7. Combination of adsorbents and other technological additives, 2.2. Nutritional additives, 2.3. Combination of miscellaneous types of feed additives (e.g., toxin-binding premixes) |
| Intervention description | free text |
| Target population/sample | free text, e.g., corn, cows, etc. |
| Outcome measured | free text, e.g., aflatoxin M1, aflatoxin G1, Aspergillus spp., etc. |
| Description of the outcome | free text |
| Data extraction from the outcome | free text |
| Study design | Values: 1. Experimental research, 1.1. Randomized controlled trial, 1.2. Nonrandomized controlled trial, 1.3. Challenge trial, 1.4. Quasi-experiment, 2. Observational research, 2.1. Cohort study, 2.2. Case–control study, 2.3. Cross-sectional study, 2.4. Other, 3. Systematic review/meta-analysis, 4. Risk assessment, risk profile, cost–benefit analysis or other risk-based tool |
| Number (magnitude) of samples | free text |
| Level of data reported | Values: individual, group |
| Was the dose response gradient measured? | Values: yes, no, not specified |
| Region of the study conducted | Values: Europe, North America, South America and the Caribbean, Africa, Asia, Australia |