Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33917531›Full record

ReviewNutrients2021

Edible Insects versus Meat-Nutritional Comparison: Knowledge of Their Composition Is the Key to Good Health.

Agnieszka Orkusz

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nutrients, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06096389 (Effect of Acheta Domesticus Supplementation on Post-Exercise Muscle Recovery in Recreationally Active Male), which is not on this map. Cited by 80 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

NCT06096389 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Effect of Acheta Domesticus Supplementation on Post-Exercise Muscle Recovery in Recreationally Active Male

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of MalayaRan2023 to 2023Enrolled39ConditionsMuscle SorenessArms100 Drop Jumps, Whey supplementation, Carbohydrate supplementation, House cricket supplementation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

80 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Feasibility of UsingFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

20 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

1 author.

Agnieszka OrkuszDepartment of Biotechnology and Food Analysis, Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, 53-345 Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-5394-7407

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recently, attention has been drawn to the fact that increasing the consumption of edible insects may positively impact the state of the natural environment and reduce the problem of malnutrition in large parts of society. Indeed, insects are seen as an alternative to traditional meat products, primarily meat. This article aimed to compare the nutritional value of edible insects and meat. Based on tables of composition and nutritional value and on the licensed computer program Diet 6D, data on the nutritional value of 10 commonly consumed meat types were compiled. Based on a literature review, data on the nutritional value of seven commercially available edible insect species were collected and collated. There was a comparison of 100 g of edible insects with 100 g of meat (fresh weight). In addition, the atherogenic index thrombogenic index, the hypocholesterolemic/hypercholesterolemic ratio, and the nutritional quality index were calculated. It was found that both meat and insects are rich in nutrients, including those considered essential for the proper development and functioning of the human body. At the same time, it has been shown that the content of individual nutrients in both insects and meat varies significantly.

Indexed as

Diet, HealthyMeatNutritive ValueAnimalsEdible InsectsFood InsecurityFood SafetyHumansMalnutritionNutrientsNutrientsdietedible insectsenvironmental concernhuman healthmeatnutritional value

Identifiers

PMID33917531
PMCPMC8067469

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.