Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 265

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 177 of the 177 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mind the gap—deficits in our knowledge of aspects impacting the bioavailability of phytochemicals and their metabolites—a position paper focusing on carotenoids and polyphenols

Open access
Bohn, Torsten, McDougall, Gordon J., Alegría, Amparo, Alminger, Marie, Arrigoni, Eva, Aura, Anna‐Marja, Brito, Catarina, Cilla, Antonio, El, Sedef N., Karakaya, Sibel, Martínez‐Cuesta, Marie C., Santos, Claudia N.·2015·Molecular Nutrition & Food Research

Abstract

Various secondary plant metabolites or phytochemicals, including polyphenols and carotenoids, have been associated with a variety of health benefits, such as reduced incidence of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and several types of cancer, most likely due to their involvement in ameliorating inflammation and oxidative stress. However, discrepancies exist between their putative effects when comparing observational and intervention studies, especially when using pure compounds. These discrepancies may in part be explained by differences in intake levels and their bioavailability. Prior to exerting their bioactivity, these compounds must be made bioavailable, and considerable differences may arise due to their matrix release, changes during digestion, uptake, metabolism, and biodistribution, even before considering dose‐ and host‐related factors. Though many insights have been gained on factors affecting secondary plant metabolite bioavailability, many gaps still exist in our knowledge. In this position paper, we highlight several major gaps in our understanding of phytochemical bioavailability, including effects of food processing, changes during digestion, involvement of cellular transporters in influx/efflux through the gastrointestinal epithelium, changes during colonic fermentation, and their phase I and phase II metabolism following absorption.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/mnfr.201400745

Cites

177 of 177 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 177 references

Cited by

See all 265

Metadata

Authors
Bohn, T., McDougall, G. J., Alegría, A., Alminger, M., Arrigoni, E., Aura, A., Brito, C., Cilla, A., El, S. N., Karakaya, S., Martínez‐Cuesta, M. C., & Santos, C. N.
Venue
Molecular Nutrition & Food Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-06-03
Volume
59
Issue
7
Pages
1307-1323
ISSN
  • 1613-4125 (ISSN-L)
  • 1613-4133
OpenAlex
W1617825834
Cited by
265
References
177
FWCI
15.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mind the gap—deficits in our knowledge of aspects impacting the bioavailability of phytochemicals and their metabolites—a position paper focusing on carotenoids and polyphenols. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/mnfr.201400745
The paper
Bohn, T., McDougall, G. J., Alegría, A., Alminger, M., Arrigoni, E., Aura, A., Brito, C., Cilla, A., El, S. N., Karakaya, S., Martínez‐Cuesta, M. C., & Santos, C. N. (2015). Mind the gap—deficits in our knowledge of aspects impacting the bioavailability of phytochemicals and their metabolites—a position paper focusing on carotenoids and polyphenols. Molecular Nutrition & Food Research. https://doi.org/10.1002/mnfr.201400745

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.