ReviewFood science of animal resources2025
Uses of Chemical Technologies for Meat Decontamination.
Review in Food science of animal resources, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Effectiveness of Postharvest Processing on Microbiological Safety of Game Meat-A Systematic Review.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2026Pooled it
- A postbiotic-aerated water strategy for controlling Salmonella Enteritidis on chicken skin during chilling and refrigerated storage.Poultry science · 2026Article
- Advanced monolayer and layer-by-layer nanocapsule systems for sustained release of carvacrol and trans-cinnamaldehyde against multidrug-resistant Salmonella in poultry.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Tradition and Innovation in Raw Meat Products with a Focus on the Steak Tartare Case.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
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
Traditional meat preservation techniques such as smoking, drying, and salting have various shortcomings and limitations in effectively reducing microbial loads and maintaining meat quality. Consequently, chemical compounds have gained attention as promising alternatives for decontamination, offering the potential to extend shelf life and minimize physical, chemical, and sensory changes in meat. Chlorine-based compounds, trisodium phosphate, organic acids, bacteriocins, lactoferrin, and peracetic acid are technologies of recent industrial applications that inhibit spoilage and pathogenic microorganisms in meat. This review explores the critical aspects of decontamination and assesses the efficacy of different chemical compounds employed in meat preservation. These compounds exhibit strong microorganism inactivation capabilities, ensuring minimal alterations to the meat matrix and substantially reducing environmental impact.
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.