ArticleInternational journal of food science2024
Assessment of Meat Content and Foreign Object Detection in Cattle Meatballs Using Ultrasonography, Radiography, and Electrical Impedance Tomography Imaging.
Article in International journal of food science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development and evaluation of a gelatin-based phantom model for veterinary diagnostic imaging training.Open veterinary journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Meat content and physically hazardous contaminants in the internal section of meatballs cannot be detected by the naked eye or surface detectors. This study is aimed at analyzing the meat content of cattle meatballs and detecting foreign objects using ultrasonography (USG), digital radiography (DR), and electrical impedance tomography (EIT). Meatballs were produced using four different meat formulations (0%, 25%, 50%, and 75% meat) and three treatments (no preservative (control), borax, and formalin preservatives). Cast iron and plastic beads were used as models of foreign objects embedded in the samples. The echogenicity, opacity, and resistivity values of each sample were evaluated and compared across groups. The results showed that the shelf life of the control meatballs was shorter than that of meatballs with preservatives. The echogenicity and opacity values for the different meat formulations were hypoechoic in USG and grey in DR. USG was able to distinguish between control and preservative-treated meatballs but could not differentiate meat content and detect foreign objects. Conversely, DR effectively assessed meat content and detected iron-based foreign objects, while EIT showed higher resistivity values for iron and plastic beads compared to the meatball bodies.
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.