↓ Skip to main content

Systematic review of emerging and innovative technologies for meat tenderisation

Overview of attention for article published in Meat Science, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
3 patents

Readers on

mendeley
196 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Systematic review of emerging and innovative technologies for meat tenderisation
Published in
Meat Science, May 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.meatsci.2017.04.241
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Consumers are the final step in the meat supply chain and meeting consumer expectations of quality and tenderness are important for satisfaction and repeat purchase. High pressure processing, shockwaves, ultrasound, pulsed electric field and muscle stretching can be applied to pre- and post-rigor meat for tenderisation. These non-thermal and thermal innovative technologies can be used with varying levels of success to cause physical disruption to muscle structure, enhanced proteolysis and ageing and muscle protein denaturation and solubilisation resulting in changes to texture and juiciness. Results of a meta-analysis are used to compare the effects of these technologies on meat tenderisation. In the future, a combination of new and innovative technologies will be ideally suited to deliver a range of desired textures for meat products.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 196 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 196 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 17%
Researcher 23 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 8%
Student > Bachelor 14 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 5%
Other 31 16%
Unknown 69 35%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 60 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 6%
Engineering 10 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 6 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 3%
Other 23 12%
Unknown 79 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 November 2023.
All research outputs
#3,799,858
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Meat Science
#168
of 1,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,846
of 324,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Meat Science
#5
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,781 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,466 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.