Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41030520›Full record

ArticleCurrent research in toxicology2025

Approach for systematically assessing study reliability and relevance in evaluations of monosodium glutamate safety.

William D Klaren, Brianna N Rivera, Amy M Sheppard, Kara Franke, Daniele S Wikoff

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current research in toxicology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

William D KlarenToxStrategies, LLC, Asheville, NC, USA.
Brianna N RiveraToxStrategies, LLC, Asheville, NC, USA.
Amy M SheppardToxStrategies, LLC, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Kara FrankeToxStrategies, LLC, Asheville, NC, USA.
Daniele S WikoffToxStrategies, LLC, Asheville, NC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Monosodium glutamate (MSG) is a well-studied food additive. In addition to numerous authoritative assessments of safety, a substantial volume of research is ongoing with MSG; this includes a growing volume of research assessing the ameliorating potential of various substances against purported MSG-induced toxicity. This work set out to develop an approach for evaluating the combined reliability and relevance of these types of investigations as part of ingredient safety assessments, and subsequently, to apply such to a case study of MSG publications involving co-exposures with other substances. The approach assesses the reliability of the studies utilizing SciRAP, and the relevance in context of study design, dose relevance, and biological validity, resulting in an overall categorization of the informativeness of an individual study, or study quality. In a case study application to 39 studies assessing MSG toxicity and ameliorative properties of a variety of substances, no publications were deemed of 'high' study quality for the purpose of assessing safety, due primarily to low relevance to human safety (e.g., use of an acute high dose during neonatal lifestages) and limited reliability in study conduct and reporting. The approach herein can facilitate objective assessments of the quality of MSG safety or toxicity studies and could also be tailored to other food additives or ingredients.

Indexed as

Critical appraisalMonosodium glutamateRelevancySafety assessmentStudy quality

Identifiers

PMID41030520
PMCPMC12478279

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.