↓ Skip to main content

Current (Food) Allergenic Risk Assessment: Is It Fit for Novel Foods? Status Quo and Identification of Gaps

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Nutrition & Food Research, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 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.
Title
Current (Food) Allergenic Risk Assessment: Is It Fit for Novel Foods? Status Quo and Identification of Gaps
Published in
Molecular Nutrition & Food Research, December 2017
DOI 10.1002/mnfr.201700278
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabriel Mazzucchelli, Thomas Holzhauser, Tanja Cirkovic Velickovic, Araceli Diaz‐Perales, Elena Molina, Paola Roncada, Pedro Rodrigues, Kitty Verhoeckx, Karin Hoffmann‐Sommergruber

Abstract

Food allergies are recognised as a global health concern. In order to protect allergic consumers from severe symptoms, allergenic risk assessment for well known foods and foods containing genetically modified ingredients was installed. However, population is steadily growing and there is a rising need to provide adequate protein-based foods, including novel sources, not yet used for human consumption. In this context safety issues such as a potential increased allergenic risk need to be assessed before marketing novel food sources. Therefore, the established allergenic risk assessment for genetically modified organisms needs to be re-evaluated for its applicability for risk assessment of novel food proteins. Two different scenarios of allergic sensitization have to be assessed. The first scenario is the presence of already known allergenic structures in novel foods. For this a comparative assessment can be performed and the range of cross-reactivity can be explored, while in the second scenario allergic reactions are observed towards so far novel allergenic structures and no reference material is available. This review summarises the current analytical methods for allergenic risk assessment, highlighting the strengths and limitations of each method and discussing the gaps in this assessment that need to be addressed in the near future. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 107 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 21%
Student > Master 12 11%
Researcher 10 9%
Other 6 6%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 41 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 47 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 November 2018.
All research outputs
#13,797,192
of 24,417,958 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Nutrition & Food Research
#1,453
of 2,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,846
of 448,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Nutrition & Food Research
#23
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,417,958 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,645 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 448,772 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.