Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40102582›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Evaluation of protein quantity and protein nutritional quality of protein bars with different protein sources.

Judit Tormási, Eszter Benes, Éva Lengyel Kónya, Mária Berki, László Abrankó

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Hybrid origin and phenotype evolution of the modern maize.Journal of integrative plant biology · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Judit TormásiInstitute of Food Science and Technology, Department of Food Chemistry and Analysis, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences (MATE), Budapest, Hungary.
Eszter BenesInstitute of Food Science and Technology, Department of Food Chemistry and Analysis, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences (MATE), Budapest, Hungary.
Éva Lengyel KónyaInstitute of Food Science and Technology, Department of Food Chemistry and Analysis, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences (MATE), Budapest, Hungary.
Mária BerkiInstitute of Food Science and Technology, Department of Food Chemistry and Analysis, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences (MATE), Budapest, Hungary.
László AbrankóInstitute of Food Science and Technology, Department of Food Chemistry and Analysis, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences (MATE), Budapest, Hungary. abranko.laszlo.peter@uni-mate.hu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A comprehensive overview of commercially available protein bars, focusing on their protein content, protein source(s) and nutritional composition. Four protein bars were selected based on the quality of their protein sources; (i) plant only (pea and rice); (ii) animal only (milk proteins); (iii) mix of animal (milk and egg) and plant (soy); (iv) mix of animal (milk and collagen) and plant (soy) to assess the relationship between protein sources and protein nutritional quality. Data analysis was conducted on data from an online consumer-generated database (OpenFoodFacts.org). Indeces of protein nutritional quality, DIAAS and PDCAAS, were determined after in vitro digestion simulation using the Infogest method. Of the 1641 bars, 81% had sufficient protein to be classified as "high in protein" (protein content > 20E%). However, the results show that lower protein digestibility values (between 47 and 81%) were measured when the proteins were included as a component of the protein bar matrix than when the digestibility of the same proteins was evaluated in a pure format. All measured in vitro-DIAAS and PDCAAS values were relatively low with the highest DIAAS = 61(Trp) and PDCAAS = 62(Trp) obtained for a protein bar containing only milk proteins (WPC, MPC). Although most protein bars are labelled 'high in protein', their protein nutritional quality could be very low based on DIAAS. The low numbers are most probably due to application of lower-nutritional-quality proteins (such as collagen) and of other ingredients such as carbohydrates, fats and fibres, that might deteriorate the bioaccessibility of essential amino acids.

Indexed as

Dietary ProteinsNutritive ValueAnimalsDigestionMilkMilk ProteinsPlant ProteinsDietary ProteinsMilk ProteinsPlant ProteinsAnimal proteinDIAASIn vitro digestion simulationPlant proteinProtein source

Identifiers

PMID40102582
PMCPMC11920265

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.