Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35540800›Full record

ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2022

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of guanidinoacetic acid for all animal species (Alzchem Trostberg GmbH).

EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP), Vasileios Bampidis, Giovanna Azimonti, Maria de Lourdes Bastos, Henrik Christensen, Birgit Dusemund, Mojca Fašmon Durjava, Maryline Kouba, Marta López-Alonso, Secundino López Puente and 14 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

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

24 authors.

EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP)
Vasileios Bampidis
Giovanna Azimonti
Maria de Lourdes Bastos
Henrik Christensen
Birgit Dusemund
Mojca Fašmon Durjava
Maryline Kouba
Marta López-Alonso
Secundino López Puente
Francesca Marcon
Baltasar Mayo
Alena Pechová
Mariana Petkova
Fernando Ramos
Yolanda Sanz
Roberto Edoardo Villa
Ruud Woutersen
Jürgen Gropp
Montserrat Anguita
Jaume Galobart
Jordi Ortuño Casanova
Fabiola Pizzo
Jordi Tarrés-Call

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of guanidinoacetic acid (GAA) when used as nutritional additive in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The FEEDAP Panel concludes that GAA at 1,200 mg/kg complete feed is safe for chickens for fattening, piglets and pigs for fattening. This concentration in complete feed would correspond to maximum concentrations in water of 600 mg GAA/L for chickens for fattening, piglets and pigs for fattening. The Panel is not in a position to conclude on a safe level of GAA in laying/reproductive birds. In the absence of data on ruminants and salmonids, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the safety of GAA for all animal species. There is no concern on consumer safety resulting from the use of GAA in feed for poultry and pigs at the proposed conditions of use. The limited data do not allow to conclude on the safety for the consumer when the additive is used in feed for ruminants or fish. GAA is not toxic by inhalation, it is not an irritant to skin and eyes, and it is not a dermal sensitiser. The FEEDAP Panel concludes that the use of GAA as feed additive is not expected to pose a risk to the environment. The use of the additive under assessment in animal nutrition at the proposed conditions of use has the potential to be efficacious in all growing avian, Suidae and ruminant (except for preruminants) species; in growing fin fish other than salmonids and in frog. It is not possible to conclude on the efficacy of the additive in other species, and in reproductive animals.

Indexed as

all animal speciesefficacyguanidinoacetic acidhomocysteinenutritional additivesafety

Identifiers

PMID35540800
PMCPMC9069547
OpenAlexW4229017835

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
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.