ArticleNutrition research and practice2025
Application of cooked meat codes to improve the validity of nutrient content estimation in a recipe-based food ingredient database.
Article in Nutrition research and practice, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesAccurate estimation of nutrient intake from food consumption requires reliable food composition data. However, since nutrient content changes during cooking, the application of raw ingredient composition may lead to overestimation, particularly for energy and fat in meat dishes. In this study, the suitability of applying cooked food codes for meat dishes to improve the validity of recipe-based nutrient content estimation was evaluated. MATERIALS/
methodsPork (thin-sliced and thick-cut belly and shoulder butt) and beef (tenderloin, loin, rib meat, and brisket point) were examined for cooking yield after grilling and their nutrient contents were estimated. Each cut was portioned to 100 g of raw meat and cooked in triplicate. Nutrient content was calculated using both raw and cooked meat codes from the Korean Standard Food Composition Table, and differences in energy, fat, and protein content were compared.
resultsWhen grilled under standardized conditions, the average cooking yield was approximately 65% for pork and 80% for beef (
conclusionIncorporating measured cooking yields and corresponding cooked meat codes into recipe-based databases can improve the accuracy of nutrient intake estimation. The development of nutrient databases that reflect differences in cooking conditions-including temperature, duration, and doneness-should be prioritized to enhance the validity of national dietary surveys.
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.