Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33195360›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in nutrition2020

The Two Faces of Wheat.

Herbert Wieser, Peter Koehler, Katharina A Scherf

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in nutrition, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 71 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Herbert WieserRetired, Freising, Germany.
Peter KoehlerBiotask AG, Esslingen am Neckar, Germany.
Katharina A ScherfDepartment of Bioactive and Functional Food Chemistry, Institute of Applied Biosciences, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany.
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wheat-based foods have been staple foods since about 10,000 years and constitute a major source of energy, dietary fiber, and micronutrients for the world population. The role of wheat in our diet, however, has recently been scrutinized by pseudoscientific books and media reports promoting the overall impression that wheat consumption makes people sick, stupid, fat, and addicted. Consequently, numerous consumers in Western countries have started to question their dietary habits related to wheat consumption and voluntarily decided to adopt a wheat-free diet without a medical diagnosis of any wheat-related disorder (WRD), such as celiac disease, wheat allergy, or non-celiac gluten sensitivity. The aim of this review is to achieve an objective judgment of the positive aspects of wheat consumption as well as adverse effects for individuals suffering from WRDs. The first part presents wheat constituents and their positive nutritional value, in particular, the consumption of products from whole-grain flours. The second part is focused on WRDs that affect predisposed individuals and can be treated with a gluten-free or -reduced diet. Based on all available scientific knowledge, wheat consumption is safe and healthy for the vast majority of people. There is no scientific evidence to support that the general population would benefit from a wheat-free diet.

Indexed as

allergybakingbreedingceliac diseaseglutennon-celiac gluten sensitivity (NCGS)nutritional valuewheat

Identifiers

PMID33195360
PMCPMC7609444
OpenAlexW3094220121

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.