Evidence mapPaperPMID 36906147Full record

ArticleAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2023

Perspective: Plant-Based Meat Alternatives Can Help Facilitate and Maintain a Lower Animal to Plant Protein Intake Ratio.

Mark Messina, Alison M Duncan, Andrea J Glenn, Francois Mariotti

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
11.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Will Australians Eat Alternative Proteins?Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Running into trouble with soy: A case report and review of our shopping carts.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Mark MessinaSoy Nutrition Institute Global, Washington, DC, USA. Electronic address: mark.messina@sniglobal.org.
Alison M DuncanDepartment of Human Health and Nutritional Sciences, University of Guelp, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
Andrea J GlennDepartment of Nutrition, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Toronto 3D Knowledge Synthesis and Clinical Trials Unit, Clinical Nutrition and Risk Factor Modification Centre, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Francois MariottiUniversité Paris-Saclay, AgroParisTech, INRAE, UMR PNCA, Palaiseau, France.
AgroParisTech · FRSt. Michael's Hospital · CAUniversity of Guelph · CAUniversity of Messina · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The health and environmental advantages of plant-predominant diets will likely lead to increasing numbers of consumers reducing their reliance on animal products. Consequently, health organizations and professionals will need to provide guidance on how best to make this change. In many developed countries, nearly twice as much protein is derived from animal versus plant sources. Potential benefits could result from consuming a higher share of plant protein. Advice to consume equal amounts from each source is more likely to be embraced than advice to eschew all or most animal products. However, much of the plant protein currently consumed comes from refined grains, which is unlikely to provide the benefits associated with plant-predominant diets. In contrast, legumes provide ample amounts of protein as well other components such as fiber, resistant starch, and polyphenolics, which are collectively thought to exert health benefits. But despite their many accolades and endorsement by the nutrition community, legumes make a negligible contribution to global protein intake, especially in developed countries. Furthermore, evidence suggests the consumption of cooked legumes will not substantially increase over the next several decades. We argue here that plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs) made from legumes are a viable alternative, or a complement, to consuming legumes in the traditional manner. These products may be accepted by meat eaters because they can emulate the orosensory properties and functionality of the foods they are intended to replace. PBMAs can be both transition foods and maintenance foods in that they can facilitate the transition to a plant-predominant diet and make it easier to maintain. PBMAs also have a distinct advantage of being able to be fortified with shortfall nutrients in plant-predominant diets. Whether existing PBMAs provide similar health benefits as whole legumes, or can be formulated to do so, remains to be established.

Indexed as

DietFabaceaeAnimalsHumansMeatNutritional StatusPlant ProteinsVegetablesPlant Proteinsanimal proteinlegumesnutrient fortificationplant-based meat alternativesplant proteinshortfall nutrientssustainability

Identifiers

PMID36906147
PMCPMC10201680
OpenAlexW4323654581

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.