Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36329117›Full record

ReviewNPJ science of food2022

A sense of ginger fraud: prevalence and deconstruction of the China-European union supply chain.

Qing Han, Sara W Erasmus, Christopher T Elliott, Saskia M van Ruth

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in NPJ science of food, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Qing HanFood Quality & Design Group, Wageningen University & Research, P.O. Box 17, 6700 AA, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Sara W ErasmusFood Quality & Design Group, Wageningen University & Research, P.O. Box 17, 6700 AA, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Christopher T ElliottInstitute for Global Food Security, Biological Sciences, 19 Chlorine Gardens, Queen's University Belfast, BT9 5DL, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK.
Saskia M van RuthFood Quality & Design Group, Wageningen University & Research, P.O. Box 17, 6700 AA, Wageningen, The Netherlands. saskia.vanruth@wur.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3955-7976

Funding

China Scholarship Council (CSC) No. 201903250123
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As an important spice, ginger has been widely distributed in the Chinese and the European Union (EU) markets, the two largest trading areas, in various forms. The ginger supply chain between China and the EU is long and complex, providing opportunities for fraudsters to deceive consumers. However, limited attention has been given to food fraud in ginger, and there is a lack of research on this topic. In this review, ginger was used as an example for interpreting the fraud issues within low-priced and high-trade volume spice products. This review aims to summarize the open access information from food and food fraud databases, literature, and stakeholders about ginger fraud, and to map, deconstruct and analyse the food fraud vulnerability in the supply chain. In addition, potential testing strategies to detect ginger fraud were also discussed. The investigation of food fraud databases, a semi-structured literature review and online interviews with stakeholders revealed that adulteration is the major fraud type in ginger products. And the most vulnerable ginger products are ground ginger and finely processed ginger. The ginger supply chain from China to the EU comprises nine stages and is medium vulnerable to food fraud, both in regard to opportunities and motivational drivers. To ensure the integrity of the ginger supply chain, there is a need to apply fraud vulnerability tools in the companies of the industry. In addition, screening and confirmatory techniques based on the characteristics of ginger should be utilised for monitoring fraud issues in the supply chain.

Identifiers

PMID36329117
PMCPMC9633793

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.