Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35010232›Full record

ReviewFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Meat Analogues in the Perspective of Recent Scientific Research: A Review.

Klaudia Kołodziejczak, Anna Onopiuk, Arkadiusz Szpicer, Andrzej Poltorak

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Exploring Sustainable Future Protein Sources.Food science of animal resources · 2025
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

4 authors.

Klaudia KołodziejczakDepartment of Technique and Food Development, Institute of Human Nutrition Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Nowoursynowska 159c Street, 32, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-8046-5403
Anna OnopiukDepartment of Technique and Food Development, Institute of Human Nutrition Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Nowoursynowska 159c Street, 32, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-9861-606X
Arkadiusz SzpicerDepartment of Technique and Food Development, Institute of Human Nutrition Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Nowoursynowska 159c Street, 32, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland.
Andrzej PoltorakDepartment of Technique and Food Development, Institute of Human Nutrition Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Nowoursynowska 159c Street, 32, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland.

Funding

The research reported in this manuscript has been financed by Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education within funds of Institute of Human Nutrition Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS), for scientific research. 00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are many reasons why consumers and food producers are looking for alternatives to meat and meat products, which includes the following: health, environmental or ethical aspects. This study reviews recent scientific reports on meat analogues. The scope of the review includes the following: formulation and nutritional value; health safety and legal regulations; manufacturing and processing technologies including the latest developments in this area; product availability on the food market; and consumer attitudes towards meat analogues. The analysis of the literature data identified technological challenges, particularly in improving consumer acceptability of meat analogues. Among the risks and limitations associated with the production of meat analogues, the following were identified: contamination from raw materials and the risk of harmful by-products due to intensive processing; legal issues of product nomenclature; and consumer attitudes towards substituting meat with plant-based alternatives. The need for further research in this area, particularly on the nutritional value and food safety of meat analogues, was demonstrated.

Indexed as

consumer acceptanceconsumptionmeat alternativesplant-based meat

Identifiers

PMID35010232
PMCPMC8750317

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.