Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33036478›Full record

ReviewFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2020

The Effects of Processing and Preservation Technologies on Meat Quality: Sensory and Nutritional Aspects.

Inmaculada Gómez, Rasmi Janardhanan, Francisco C Ibañez, María José Beriain

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 91 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
91citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

91 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Encapsulation ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

31 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Inmaculada GómezDepartamento de Biotecnología y Ciencia de los Alimentos, Universidad de Burgos, 09001 Burgos, Spain.
Rasmi JanardhananResearch Institute for Innovation & Sustainable Development in Food Chain, Universidad Pública de Navarra, Campus de Arrosadía, 31006 Pamplona, Spain.
Francisco C IbañezResearch Institute for Innovation & Sustainable Development in Food Chain, Universidad Pública de Navarra, Campus de Arrosadía, 31006 Pamplona, Spain.
María José BeriainResearch Institute for Innovation & Sustainable Development in Food Chain, Universidad Pública de Navarra, Campus de Arrosadía, 31006 Pamplona, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review describes the effects of processing and preservation technologies on sensory and nutritional quality of meat products. Physical methods such as dry aging, dry curing, high pressure processing (HPP), conventional cooking, sous-vide cooking and 3D printing are discussed. Chemical and biochemical methods as fermentation, smoking, curing, marination, and reformulation are also reviewed. Their technical limitations, due to loss of sensory quality when nutritional value of these products is improved, are presented and discussed. There are several studies focused either on the nutritional or sensorial quality of the processed meat products, but more studies with an integration of the two aspects are necessary. Combination of different processing and preservation methods leads to better results of sensory quality; thus, further research in combinations of different techniques are necessary, such that the nutritional value of meat is not compromised.

Indexed as

meatnutritional valuepreservationprocessingsensory quality

Identifiers

PMID33036478
PMCPMC7601710

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.