Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31598097›Full record

ReviewNutrition bulletin2019

Improving pulse crops as a source of protein, starch and micronutrients.

G H J Robinson, J Balk, C Domoney

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nutrition bulletin, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
17.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 114 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Nutritional Value Evaluation of New Pea Genotypes (Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Effects of Pea (Nutrients · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Therapeutic Applications and Effects ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

G H J RobinsonDepartment of Metabolic Biology John Innes Centre, Norwich Research Park Norwich UK.
J BalkDepartment of Biological Chemistry John Innes Centre, Norwich Research Park Norwich UK.
C DomoneyDepartment of Metabolic Biology John Innes Centre, Norwich Research Park Norwich UK.
Norwich Research Park · GBJohn Innes Centre · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pulse crops have been known for a long time to have beneficial nutritional profiles for human diets but have been neglected in terms of cultivation, consumption and scientific research in many parts of the world. Broad dietary shifts will be required if anthropogenic climate change is to be mitigated in the future, and pulse crops should be an important component of this change by providing an environmentally sustainable source of protein, resistant starch and micronutrients. Further enhancement of the nutritional composition of pulse crops could benefit human health, helping to alleviate micronutrient deficiencies and reduce risk of chronic diseases such as type 2 diabetes. This paper reviews current knowledge regarding the nutritional content of pea (

Indexed as

biofortificationessential amino acidsfavismlegumeresistant starchsustainability

Identifiers

PMID31598097
PMCPMC6772023
OpenAlexW2969987124

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.