Trial reportNutrients2024
Effect on Satiety-Related Biomarkers of Bar Snacks Containing Chickpea Flour and Pork Protein.
Trial report in Nutrients, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This project aims to establish the acceptability and satiety of a hybrid snack containing plant protein and a small percentage of animal protein compared to a meat-based snack.
designRandomised, crossover, double-blind, controlled post-prandial trial involving 24 participants (18-30 years), with two interventions: (a) a hybrid snack containing plant protein derived from chickpeas and 6.6% lean high-quality pork meat; and (b) a meat-based snack containing 90% lean pork meat.
methodsGeneral, life-style, sensory acceptability questionnaire, and the following laboratory analyses were performed: lipid profile, endocannabinoids, and related compounds.
resultsSensory questionnaires showed in general good acceptability for both bars. Additionally, there was a greater increase in glycemia at 30, 60, and 90 min after consuming the hybrid snack compared to the meat-based snack, with no changes in the lipid profile. Regarding the endocannabinoid compounds and related compounds, the compound N-palmitoleoyl ethanolamine in the acylethanolamide group showed higher levels overall following the consumption of the hybrid snack compared to the meat-based snack, particularly at 2 h.
conclusionsThe hybrid snack was associated with changes in endocannabinoid-like compounds. Therefore, it may provide a lasting satiating effect, while complementing the protein profile of plant-based foods with the quality of animal protein.
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.