Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30214640›Full record

ReviewGenes & nutrition2018

Biomarkers of legume intake in human intervention and observational studies: a systematic review.

Pedapati S C Sri Harsha, Roshaida Abdul Wahab, Mar Garcia-Aloy, Francisco Madrid-Gambin, Sheila Estruel-Amades, Bernhard Watzl, Cristina Andrés-Lacueva, Lorraine Brennan

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genes & nutrition, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Meeting report: plant-rich dietary patterns and health.The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Non-targeted metabolomics of cooked cowpeaFood chemistry. Molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Pedapati S C Sri Harsha1UCD School of Agriculture and Food Science, UCD Institute of Food and Health, UCD, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Roshaida Abdul Wahab1UCD School of Agriculture and Food Science, UCD Institute of Food and Health, UCD, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Mar Garcia-Aloy2Biomarkers and Nutrimetabolomic Laboratory, Department of Nutrition, Food Sciences and Gastronomy, XaRTA, INSA, Faculty of Pharmacy and Food Sciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Francisco Madrid-Gambin2Biomarkers and Nutrimetabolomic Laboratory, Department of Nutrition, Food Sciences and Gastronomy, XaRTA, INSA, Faculty of Pharmacy and Food Sciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Sheila Estruel-Amades2Biomarkers and Nutrimetabolomic Laboratory, Department of Nutrition, Food Sciences and Gastronomy, XaRTA, INSA, Faculty of Pharmacy and Food Sciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Bernhard Watzl4Department of Physiology and Biochemistry of Nutrition, Max Rubner-Institut, Federal Research Institute of Nutrition and Food, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Cristina Andrés-Lacueva2Biomarkers and Nutrimetabolomic Laboratory, Department of Nutrition, Food Sciences and Gastronomy, XaRTA, INSA, Faculty of Pharmacy and Food Sciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Lorraine Brennan1UCD School of Agriculture and Food Science, UCD Institute of Food and Health, UCD, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-0461-626X
Institute of Agrifood Research and Technology · ESFood for Health Ireland · IEMax Rubner Institut · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a growing interest in assessing dietary intake more accurately across different population groups, and biomarkers have emerged as a complementary tool to replace traditional dietary assessment methods. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the literature available and evaluate the applicability and validity of biomarkers of legume intake reported across various observational and intervention studies. A systematic search in PubMed, Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge identified 44 studies which met the inclusion criteria for the review. Results from observational studies focused on soy or soy-based foods and demonstrated positive correlations between soy intake and urinary, plasma or serum isoflavonoid levels in different population groups. Similarly, intervention studies demonstrated increased genistein and daidzein levels in urine and plasma following soy intake. Both genistein and daidzein exhibited dose-response relationships. Other isoflavonoid levels such as

Indexed as

BiomarkersLegumesMetabolomics

Identifiers

PMID30214640
PMCPMC6131749
OpenAlexW2890899902

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.