ReviewFrontiers in nutrition2024
Evolution and significance of amino acid scores for protein quality.
Review in Frontiers in nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Pond to Plate: Tailored Functional Proteins for Next-Gen Microalgal Food.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Impact of Ginger Straw on Cultivation and Quality ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Taxonomic Identification and Nutritional Analysis ofMarine drugs · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Amino acid scores have become very popular protein quality scores since their definition and recommendation by FAO expert groups. The chemical score is the central pillar of this method, and has been refined with digestibility correction factors, such as protein digestibility for the PD-CAAS and amino acid digestibility for the DIAAS. Several elements need to be taken into account to properly determine these scores, not only from a methodological point of view but also in order to reconcile regulation, pragmatism, accuracy and also biological significance. This review offers a reminder of the main points raised in the FAO reports on protein and AA requirements in 1995 and 2007, and on protein quality in 1991 and 2013. It also highlights the factors that most impact score metrics, and in particular the choice of reference pattern and protein determination in the food. Lastly, the scores are compared, and versus another quality score based on the physiological response, the protein efficiency ratio.
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.