ReviewFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Scientometric and Methodological Analysis of the Recent Literature on the Health-Related Effects of Tomato and Tomato Products.
Review in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Overview of Deep Learning and Nondestructive Detection Technology for Quality Assessment of Tomatoes.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Synthetic biology in plants.Plant biotechnology (Tokyo, Japan) · 2024Article
- Article
- Low-Cost Sensor for Lycopene Content Measurement in Tomato Based on Raspberry Pi 4.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Non-Destructive Quality Evaluation of 80 Tomato Varieties Using Vis-NIR Spectroscopy.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Comparison of the Peel-Associated Epiphytic Bacteria of Anthocyanin-Rich "Sun Black" and Wild-Type Tomatoes under Organic and Conventional Farming.Microorganisms · 2022Article
- Natural Active Ingredients for Poly (Lactic Acid)-Based Materials: State of the Art and Perspectives.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The health benefits of tomato, a vegetable consumed daily in human diets, have received great attention in the scientific community, and a great deal of experiments have tested their utility against several diseases. Herein, we present a scientometric analysis of recent works aimed to estimate the biological effects of tomato, focusing on bibliographic metadata, type of testers, target systems, and methods of analysis. A remarkably variable array of strategies was reported, including testers obtained by standard and special tomatoes, and the use of in vitro and in vivo targets, both healthy and diseased. In vitro, 21 normal and 36 cancer human cell lines derived from 13 different organs were used. The highest cytotoxic effects were reported on cancer blood cells. In vivo, more experiments were carried out with murine than with human systems, addressing healthy individuals, as well as stressed and diseased patients. Multivariate analysis showed that publications in journals indexed in the agriculture category were associated with the use of fresh tomatoes; conversely, medicine and pharmacology journals were associated with the use of purified and formulate testers. Studies conducted in the United States of America preferentially adopted in vivo systems and formulates, combined with blood and tissue analysis. Researchers in Italy, China, India, and Great Britain mostly carried out in vitro research using fresh tomatoes. Gene expression and proteomic analyses were associated with China and India. The emerging scenario evidences the somewhat dichotomic approaches of plant geneticists and agronomists and that of cell biologists and medicine researchers. A higher integration between these two scientific communities would be desirable to foster the assessment of the benefits of tomatoes to human health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.