ArticleScientific reports2026
Assessing post-harvest loss data reporting methods for tomato in least developed countries.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
Post-harvest losses in tomato production affect food availability and income generation in Least Developed Countries (LDCs). This study examines tomato post-harvest loss data reported as a percentage of total domestic production, with two objectives: to evaluate reporting methods in the FAO Food Loss and Waste Database and to analyze reported loss magnitudes across supply chain phases. FAOSTAT data from 2000 to 2022 were used for nine LDCs: Tanzania, Bangladesh, Benin, Nepal, Cambodia, Rwanda, Ethiopia, Lao People's Democratic Republic, and Niger. Quantitative analysis applied univariate and multivariate approaches, including Analysis of Variance and Kruskal-Wallis tests, to assess variation across countries, years, and supply chain stages. Reported tomato post-harvest losses ranged from 20 to 50%, with marked differences across countries and phases. Tanzania recorded 50% loss at the retail stage in 2005, while Benin, Nepal, and Bangladesh reported losses of 39.5%, 35%, and 32.9%, respectively. Lower losses were observed in Cambodia (24.6%), Nepal (23%), Ethiopia (17%), Lao People's Democratic Republic (16.9%), Niger (15%), and Rwanda (14.7%). Loss estimates varied in magnitude and by supply chain stage, reflecting differences in reporting approaches and data sources. These results show that variation in reported tomato post-harvest losses is closely linked to reporting methods and stage definitions rather than production conditions alone. The study contributes by identifying limitations in cross-country comparability within FAOSTAT and clarifying how reporting heterogeneity affects interpretation of loss estimates. Strengthened reporting consistency and transparency would support more reliable analyses and evidence-based decisions for tomato post-harvest management in LDCs.
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.