Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35619588›Full record

ReviewCurrent research in food science2022

Natalie Mudd, Andrea M Liceaga

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current research in food science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Phytochemical Profile, Antioxidant Activity, and Neuroprotective Effects ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. A Brief Review on Caenorhabditis elegans Role in Modelling Neurodegenerative Disease.Central nervous system agents in medicinal chemistry · 2025
    Review
  11. Erucin, a Natural Isothiocyanate, Prevents Polyglutamine-Induced Toxicity inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  12. Maackiain Mimics Caloric Restriction throughInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    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

2 authors.

Natalie MuddProtein Chemistry and Bioactive Peptide Laboratory, Department of Food Science, College of Agriculture, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA.
Andrea M LiceagaProtein Chemistry and Bioactive Peptide Laboratory, Department of Food Science, College of Agriculture, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Bioactive compoundsCaenorhabditis elegansFunctional foodsIn vivo model

Identifiers

PMID35619588
PMCPMC9126841

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-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.