ArticleItalian journal of food safety2025
EN 1785:2003 method for the identification of ionizing treatment in poultry meat products: optimization of the accelerated solvent extraction procedure.
Article in Italian journal of food safety, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
X-ray irradiation is a non-thermal technology used for food preservation and sanitization to prolong shelf life. To evaluate the fraudulent use of X-ray treatment, in this study, an accelerated solvent extraction method was optimized for the extraction of lipids and 2-dodecylcyclobutanone (2-DCB), reducing analysis time and solvent consumption compared to Soxhlet extraction reported in the standard EN 1785:2003 method. The qualitative confirmation method was tested on different processed poultry meats, i.e., sausages and hamburgers, irradiated at different dose levels, that is, 0.5, 1.0, and 3.0 kGy. The analytical parameters investigated, namely method linearity, selectivity, minimum dose level, diagnostic sensitivity and specificity, and recovery, showed that the proposed method is suitable for routine analysis in official controls to determine 2-DCB as an irradiation marker.
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.