MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402393993 · doi:10.1111/ijfs.17550

How to reduce gluten in foods: a critical review of patents

2024· review· en· W4402393993 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Gélinas, Jérémie Théolier

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Food Science & Technology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCeliac Disease Research and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCegep de Saint HyacintheAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlutenFood scienceBusinessChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Specific gluten protein fractions cause major health problems to individuals with coeliac disease. The aim of this study was to review gluten reduction in foods based on information disclosed in patents, a rarely cited source, with support from science. Overall, 89 patents on gluten reduction in foods were published up to August 2024, and 79% reported unique information, not mentioned in the scientific literature. The most popular topics were wheat and barley genes modifications, proteolytic enzymes for brewing, and proteolytic bacterial starters for bread making. Other gluten detoxification and removal techniques comprised kernels sorting, as well as separation, binding, heating, and chemical treatments. Extensive degradation of gluten-containing ingredients impaired much food properties, especially in bread. Few patented inventions on gluten reduction would meet the needs of coeliac persons because gluten-free foods need to be prepared with low-gluten ingredients, as confirmed by proper analytical techniques.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.364 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Food Science & TechnologySame topicCeliac Disease Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207