MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006406992 · doi:10.1080/10408398.2020.1722942

Critical reviews and recent advances of novel non-thermal processing techniques on the modification of food allergens

2020· review· en· W3006406992 on OpenAlexaff
Xin Dong, Jin Wang, Vijaya Raghavan

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood processingFood allergySteamingFood industryFood productsFermentation in food processingMedicineRisk analysis (engineering)BiotechnologyAllergyComputer scienceBiochemical engineeringFood scienceEngineeringBiologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, the increasing prevalence of food allergy has become a public concern related to human health worldwide. Thus, it is imperative and necessary to provide some efficient methods for the management of food allergy. Some conventional processing methods (e.g., boiling and steaming) have been applied in the reduction of food immunoreactivity, while these treatments significantly destroy nutritional components present in food sources. Several studies have shown that novel processing techniques generally have better performance in retaining original characteristics of food and improving the efficiency of eliminating allergens. This review has focused on the recent advances of novel non-thermal processing techniques including high-pressure processing, ultrasound, pulsed light, cold plasma, fermentation, pulsed electric field, enzymatic hydrolysis, and the combination processing of them. Meanwhile, general information on global food allergy prevalence and food allergy pathology are also described. Hopefully, these findings regarding the modifications on the food allergens through various novel food processing techniques can provide an in-depth understanding in the mechanism of food allergy, which in turn possibly provides a strategy to adapt in the reduction of food immunoreactivity for the food industries.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.197
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations181
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Reviews in Food Science and NutritionSame topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchFrench-language works237,207