Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33126518›Full record

ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Cricket-Enriched Oat Biscuit: Technological Analysis and Sensory Evaluation.

Barbara Biró, Mária Anna Sipos, Anikó Kovács, Katalin Badak-Kerti, Klára Pásztor-Huszár, Attila Gere

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Unraveling the physicochemical attributes of three cricket (Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft + [i.e. und] Technologie. Food science + technology. Science + technologie alimentaire · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Adding Mealworm (Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    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

6 authors.

Barbara BiróInstitute of Food Technology, Faculty of Food Science, Szent István University, Villányi út 29-43, 1118 Budapest, Hungary.
Mária Anna SiposInstitute of Food Technology, Faculty of Food Science, Szent István University, Villányi út 29-43, 1118 Budapest, Hungary.
Anikó KovácsInstitute of Food Technology, Faculty of Food Science, Szent István University, Villányi út 29-43, 1118 Budapest, Hungary.
Katalin Badak-KertiInstitute of Food Technology, Faculty of Food Science, Szent István University, Villányi út 29-43, 1118 Budapest, Hungary.
Klára Pásztor-HuszárInstitute of Food Technology, Faculty of Food Science, Szent István University, Villányi út 29-43, 1118 Budapest, Hungary.
Attila GereInstitute of Food Technology, Faculty of Food Science, Szent István University, Villányi út 29-43, 1118 Budapest, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0003-3075-1561

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Insect-containing products are gaining more space in the market. Bakery products are one of the most promising since the added ground insects can enhance not only the nutritional quality of the dough, but technological parameters and sensory properties of the final products. In the present research, different amounts of ground

Indexed as

check-all-that-apply methodedible insectentomophagynovel foodoat biscuit

Identifiers

PMID33126518
PMCPMC7692980

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.