ArticlePloS one2025
Public discourses of alternative protein foods in Facebook public pages' posts, 2014-2024.
Article in PloS one, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
"Alternative protein" (AP) refers to protein sources that are different from conventional animal-based proteins. This category encompasses a variety of highly processed plant-based proteins, cultured or cell-based meat, and is primarily driven by factors like sustainability, health, ethical concerns about animal welfare, and the need to feed a growing global population. The aim of this study is to map and understand public discourses around AP foods through social monitoring, in particular, computational analyses of social media big data. Through analyzing the topics and sentiments of Facebook public pages' English content in the decade of 2014-2024, we found that (1) public attention on plant-based AP foods dropped since 2021, while attention on cell-based AP foods showed an uneven growth; (2) public sentiments towards plant-based AP foods were consistently positive, while sentiments towards cell-based AP foods were clearly more mixed; (3) discussion topics under plant-based AP foods were more practical and diverse than topics under cell-based AP foods; (4) the leading actors talking about AP foods were enterprises & industry, media, and organizations. Overall, plant-based AP foods have generated a more established and diverse public discourse, while cell-based AP foods are still emerging in public conversations and continue to face greater barriers to widespread understanding and acceptance.
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.