ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Antioxidant Activity of Beef, Pork and Chicken Burgers before and after Cooking and after In Vitro Intestinal Digestion.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effect of Wheat Bran on the Chemical Composition, Texture, and Oxidative Stability of Beef Meatballs.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Impact of Cherry Powder as a Natural Antioxidant on Quality, Oxidative Stability and Microbial Activity of Ready-to-Eat Beef Patties.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Natural Ingredients to Enhance the Antioxidant Capacity in Different Meat Products: A Review.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Plant-Based vs. Pork Sausages: Protein Nutritional Quality and Antioxidant Potential in the Bioaccessible Fraction.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effects of Inoculating Autochthonous Starter Cultures on Changes ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Effects of Balsa Fish Skin Gelatin,Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the present work was to evaluate and compare in vitro the antioxidant activity of raw, cooked and cooked-digested pork, beef and chicken burgers. The cooking process influenced the antioxidant capacity of the meat by decreasing the values of ABTS, FRAP and the content of free thiols. Conversely, a positive effect was observed after in vitro gastrointestinal digestion which increased the biological activity of the meat, characterised by greater antioxidant activity. The type of meat influenced the chemical composition and biological capacity of the burgers. In fact, both before and after the cooking process, beef burgers showed higher thiol content and, consequently, a higher oxidative stability of proteins than chicken and pork burgers. In vitro gastrointestinal digestion also improved the nutraceutical quality of beef burgers, which showed higher ABTS values and thiol content than pork burgers, which showed higher FRAP values. This work aims to support the potential of meat constituents as a natural antioxidant component that is essential to counteract the oxidative stress responsible for imbalances in the human organism and several cardiovascular diseases.
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.