Pectin Microwave Assisted Extraction from Pumpkin Peels: Process Optimization and Chemical-Physical and Rheological Characterization.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Decoding dietary pectin: from structural complexity and microbial CAZyme-PUL networks to cross-feeding and host-beneficial metabolites.Gut microbes · 2026
   Review
2. Extraction, characterization and antioxidant activity evaluation of collagen from Monopterus albus bones.Journal of the science of food and agriculture · 2026
   Article
3. Valorization of Vegetable Processing Residues for Functional Biodegradable Films in Sustainable Food Packaging.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
   Review
4. The effect of microbial transglutaminase and pumpkin peel on physicochemical, microstructural, and oxidative characteristics of camel milk yogurt during cold storage.Food chemistry: X · 2025
   Article

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

Abstract

Indexed as