Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24171164›Full record

ArticleBioMed research international2013

Bioactive compounds and antioxidant activity of fresh and processed white cauliflower.

Fouad A Ahmed, Rehab F M Ali

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioMed research international, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 171 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Fouad A AhmedDepartment of Biochemistry, Faculty of Agriculture, Cairo University, Giza 12613, Egypt.
Rehab F M Ali
Cairo University · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Brassica species are very rich in health-promoting phytochemicals, including phenolic compounds, vitamin C, and minerals. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of different blanching (i.e., water and steam) and cooking (i.e., water boiling, steam boiling, microwaving, and stir-frying) methods on the nutrient components, phytochemical contents (i.e., polyphenols, carotenoids, flavonoid, and ascorbic acid), antioxidant activity measured by DPPH assay, and phenolic profiles of white cauliflower. Results showed that water boiling and water blanching processes had a great effect on the nutrient components and caused significant losses of dry matter, protein, and mineral and phytochemical contents. However, steam treatments (blanching and cooking), stir-frying, and microwaving presented the lowest reductions. Methanolic extract of fresh cauliflower had significantly the highest antioxidant activity (68.91%) followed by the extracts of steam-blanched, steam-boiled, stir-fried, and microwaved cauliflower 61.83%, 59.15%, 58.93%, and 58.24%, respectively. HPLC analysis revealed that the predominant phenolics of raw cauliflower were protocatechuic acid (192.45), quercetin (202.4), pyrogallol (18.9), vanillic acid (11.90), coumaric acid (6.94), and kaempferol (25.91) mg/100 g DW, respectively.

Indexed as

Food AnalysisAntioxidantsBrassicaCarotenoidsChromatography, High Pressure LiquidHot TemperatureHumansPhytochemicalsPolyphenolsProteinsAntioxidantsCarotenoidsPhytochemicalsPolyphenolsProteins

Identifiers

PMID24171164
PMCPMC3793502
OpenAlexW2112626560

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.