Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35885304›Full record

ReviewFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Benefits and Risks Associated with Meat Consumption during Key Life Processes and in Relation to the Risk of Chronic Diseases.

Carlotta Giromini, D Ian Givens

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
15.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Antioxidant Activity ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Carlotta GirominiDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Science, University of Milan, 20133 Milano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3717-5336
D Ian GivensInstitute for Food, Nutrition and Health, University of Reading, Reading RG6 6EU, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6754-6935
University of Milan · ITUniversity of Reading · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Red meat has been an important part of the diet throughout human evolution. Overall, when included as part of a healthy and varied diet, red meat can provide a rich source of bioavailable essential nutrients and high biological value protein. The present paper discusses the dietary role/impact of red and processed meat, with some reference to the relative effect of white meat, in a range of chronic conditions including iron-deficiency anaemia, cardiovascular diseases (CVD), cancer and dementia. The role of red meat in relation to key physiological conditions such as maintaining skeletal muscle and bone health and during pregnancy is also discussed. The inclusion of lean red meat in a healthy, varied diet may be beneficial during these critical conditions. There is however increasing evidence that red meat and especially processed meat are associated with increased risks of CVD, cancer and dementia whereas white meat is neutral or associated with a lower risk. There now seems little doubt that processed and unprocessed meat should have separate public dietary guidance.

Indexed as

anaemiabone healthchronic diseasesdementiapregnancyprocessed meatred meat

Identifiers

PMID35885304
PMCPMC9318327
OpenAlexW4285092550

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.