ReviewFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Scoping Review of Pre-Consumption Food Loss in the US Supply Chain: Factors, Impacts, and Solutions.
Review in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
Food waste is a major global problem that worsens food insecurity and contributes to environmental challenges and resource depletion. Reducing food waste, especially before it reaches consumers, is a crucial strategy for combating food insecurity and advancing environmental sustainability. This scoping review examines the factors, impacts, and practices related to food loss and waste (FLW) in the pre-consumption stage of the U.S. supply chain using a predefined coding scheme. A machine learning technique (i.e., topic modeling) was used to supplement the manual coding to identify themes. Findings from 104 articles from 2015 to 2024 revealed that (a) macro and micro-level factors were understudied; (b) impacts of FLW were predominantly assessed in terms of environmental consequences, with less attention given to economic, social, cultural, and political impacts; (c) despite the high concentration on donation, prevention, recovery, and recycling as solutions, there were critical gaps in the exploration of policy and regulatory strategies, as well as education and awareness; and (d) minimization is the most dominant approach compared to prevention. We recommend that more research focus on causes of food loss, economic, social, cultural, and political impacts, policy and regulatory strategies, as well as education and awareness. We also recommend shifting from weak minimization efforts to strong prevention practices, emphasizing cooperation among all participants in the supply chain.
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.