ReviewNPJ science of food2022
A sense of ginger fraud: prevalence and deconstruction of the China-European union supply chain.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multi-Platform Metabolomics for Fraud Detection in Spices and Botanical Food Supplements: From Fingerprint Acquisition to Decision-Grade Evidence.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Non-Targeted Metabolomics Reveals the Metabolic Differentiation of Rice from Adjacent Small-Scale Producing Areas and Its Response to Climatic and Soil Factors.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Classification of Crab-Field Rice and Conventional Rice Based on Multi-Element, Stable Isotope, and Non-Targeted Metabolome Combined with Chemometrics.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Gas chromatography-ion mobility spectrometry-based fingerprint analysis of volatile flavor compounds in ginger cultivated under different conditions.Current research in food science · 2025Article
- Food fraud threats in UK post-harvest seafood supply chains; an assessment of current vulnerabilities.NPJ science of food · 2024Article
- Botanical Ingredient Forensics: Detection of Attempts to Deceive Commonly Used Analytical Methods for Authenticating Herbal Dietary and Food Ingredients and Supplements.Journal of natural products · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
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
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.