ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2023
Non-animal-based options for animal-based foods- towards a systematic terminology.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ultra-processed Plant Foods: Are They Worse than their Unprocessed Animal-Based Counterparts?Current nutrition reports · 2025Review
- Alginate oligosaccharides in the food industry: emerging functional roles, health benefits, and technological applications - Review.Food chemistry: X · 2025Review
- Perspectives in the Scientific Literature on the Barriers and Benefits of the Transition to a Plant-Based Diet: A Bibliometric Analysis.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Creating alternative seafood flavour from non-animal ingredients: A review of key flavour molecules relevant to seafood.Food chemistry: X · 2024Review
- Alternative proteins; A path to sustainable diets and environment.Current research in food science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The market has seen a rapid increase in animal-free products intended to replace animal-based foods due to concerns for human health and environmental sustainability. However, there is a lack of consistent terminology for these products, with various terms being used interchangeably, creating ambiguity. To address this issue, we propose a systematic nomenclature that defines the most commonly used terms, namely alternative, substitute, replacement, and analog, along with examples of each. In this nomenclature, a substitute primarily serves a culinary purpose, while a replacement is concerned with nutritional properties. An analog strives to satisfy both culinary and nutritional attributes to closely mimic animal-based foods in terms of sensory, nutritional, and functional characteristics. The term "alternative" serves as an umbrella term encompassing all possibilities. This work aims to promote a clearer understanding of such products and their intended use and facilitate a unified use of terminology across disciplines. This will also enable informed decision-making for consumers and greater transparency in the food industry. The health and environmental implications of these products are not discussed in this perspective.
Indexed as
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.