ReviewGeoHealth2024
Mitigating Toxic Metal Exposure Through Leafy Greens: A Comprehensive Review Contrasting Cadmium and Lead in Spinach.
Review in GeoHealth, 2024. 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.
- Multi-Targeted Mechanisms of Phytochemicals in Mitigating Cadmium-Induced Breast Cancer.Medicines (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Effect of Spinacia oleracea on In Vitro Disintegration and Dissolution of Clopidogrel Bisulfate Tablets.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2026Article
- Study on the physiological and metabolic mechanisms of exogenous quercetin in cadmium hyperaccumulatorFrontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Analysis of Elemental Concentrations and Risk Assessment of Prepared Livestock and Poultry Meat Dishes Sold in Zhejiang Province.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Mitigating Toxic Metal Exposure Through Leafy Greens: A Comprehensive Review Contrasting Cadmium and Lead in Spinach.GeoHealth · 2024Review
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
Metals and metalloids (hereafter, metal(loid)s) in plant-based foods are a source of exposure to humans, but not all metal(loid)-food interactions are the same. Differences exist between metal(loid)s in terms of their behavior in soils and in how they are taken up by plants and stored in the edible plant tissue/food. Thus, there cannot be one consistent solution to reducing toxic metal(loid)s exposure to humans from foods. In addition, how metal(loid)s are absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and excreted by the human body differs based on both the metal(loid), other elements and nutrients in the food, and the nutritional status of the human. Initiatives like the United States Food and Drug Administration's Closer to Zero initiative to reduce the exposure of young children to the toxic elements cadmium, lead, arsenic, and mercury from foods warrant careful consideration of each metal(loid) and plant interaction. This review explores such plant-metal(loid) interactions using the example of spinach and the metals cadmium and lead. This review highlights differences in the magnitude of exposure, bioavailability, and the practicality of mitigation strategies while outlining research gaps and future needs. A focus on feasibility and producer needs, informed via stakeholder interviews, emphasizes the need for better analytical testing facilities and grower and consumer education. More research should focus on minimization of chloride inputs for leafy greens to lessen plant-availability of Cd and the role of oxalate in reducing Cd bioavailability from spinach. These findings are applicable to other leafy greens (e.g., kale, lettuce), but not for other plants or metal(loid)s.
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.