ReviewFood production, processing and nutrition2025
The impact of consumer in-home cooking methods on the physicochemical, sensory, and nutritional attributes of plant-based meat analogues (PBMAs) and meat: a review.
Review in Food production, processing and nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Air Jet Impingement Baking of Bread: Heat-Mass Transfer Dynamics and Process Optimization.Journal of food science · 2026Article
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
The global demand for Plant-based meat analogues (PBMAs) is rising due to increasing vegetarianism, health and environmental concerns, and animal-welfare issues. However, PBMAs encounter several challenges that limit widespread acceptance, including inadequate physico-chemical, sensory, and nutritional attributes, and concerns about over-processing and potential food-safety risks. To address these challenges, initiatives such as using high-quality raw materials, blending various plant protein sources, and employing innovative processing techniques are underway. Consumer acceptance of PBMAs also depends on the type of in-home cooking method used to prepare these foods, and the goal in many cases is for the quality attributes after cooking to resemble that of meat. The objective of this review is to compare the effects of in-home cooking methods on the quality of meat products to better understand how PBMAs will perform relative to their animal-based counterparts. Here, research articles that evaluate the impact of different cooking methods (e.g., baking and pan-frying) on the quality of meat and PBMAs were systematically summarized and compared to demonstrate trends in changes related to the physicochemical, sensory, and nutritional attributes of these products. The results revealed that the type of cooking method significantly influenced consumers' acceptance of meat and PBMAs. Changes in physical properties such as cooking loss and water holding capacity (WHC) can affect texture and were dependent on cooking temperatures. However, these changes were not independent of the protein source (PBMAs) or muscle type (meat). For example, cooking at 70 °C decreased the amount of sulfhydryl content in PBMAs compared to pork and beef burgers (20 µmol/g vs. 65 µmol/g protein, respectively). Conversely, when cooking temperatures (> 120 °C) were used, maillard reaction resulted in favourable sensory (appearance and flavour) attributes in both types of products, however, in the presence of sugars and the amino acid asparagine, concerns about the presence of chemical hazards such as acrylamide increased. Microwave cooking also increased WHC and oil absorption properties of plant proteins which improved the mouthfeel of PMBAs. In conclusion, there is a need to optimize in-home cooking techniques to enhance desirable textures and flavours in PBMAs which will improve consumer acceptability of these products. Graphical Abstract:
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.