Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 469

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How well do plant based alternatives fare nutritionally compared to cow’s milk?

Open access
Vanga, Sai Kranthi, Raghavan, Vijaya·2018·Journal of Food Science and Technology
DOI 10.1007/s13197-017-2915-y
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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 · 10.1007/s13197-017-2915-y

Cites

55 of 55 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 55 references

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Cuppari C, Manti S, Salpietro A, Dugo G, Gitto E, Arrigo T, Sturiale M, Salpietro C (2015) Almond milk: a potential therapeutic weapon against cows milk protein allergy. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents 29:8–12
  2. Douglas G (1995) Dairy science and technology education series. University of Guelph, Guelph
  3. Eshtiaghi MN, Paoplook K (2013) Application of high electric field pulses in coconut milk processing. Int J Agric Innov Res 2:357–362
  4. Jaffé WR (2015) Nutritional and functional components of non centrifugal cane sugar: a compilation of the data from the analytical literature. J Food Compos Anal 43:194–202. doi: 10.1016/j.jfca.2015.06.007 · DOI
  5. Marina AM, NurulAzizah S (2014) Use of coconut versus dairy milk products in Malaysian dishes: comparison of nutritional composition and sensory evaluation. J Food Nutr Res 2:204–208 · doi:10.12691/jfnr-2-4-12
  6. Massa G, Vanoppen A, Gillis P, Aerssens P, Alliet P, Raes M (2001) Protein malnutrition due to replacement of milk by rice drink. Eur J Pediatr 160:382–384. doi: 10.1007/s004310100746 · doi:10.1007/s004310100746
  7. Murugkar DA (2014) Effect of sprouting of soybean on the chemical composition and quality of soymilk and tofu. J Food Sci Technol 51:915–921. doi: 10.1007/s13197-011-0576-9 · doi:10.1007/s13197-011-0576-9
  8. Murugkar DA (2015) Effect of different process parameters on the quality of soymilk and tofu from sprouted soybean. J Food Sci Technol 52:2886–2893. doi: 10.1007/s13197-014-1320-z · doi:10.1007/s13197-014-1320-z
  9. Newmark HL (1987) Nutrient density: an important and useful tool for laboratory animal studies. Carcinogenesis 8:871–873. doi: 10.1093/carcin/8.7.871 · doi:10.1093/carcin/8.7.871
  10. Oxford English Dictionary (OED) (2016) milk, n.1 and adj. Oxford University Press, United Kingdom
  11. Shannon R, Rodriguez JM (2014) Total arsenic in rice milk. Food Addit Contam Part B 7:54–56 · doi:10.1080/19393210.2013.842941

Cited by

See all 469

Metadata

Authors
Vanga, S. K., & Raghavan, V.
Venue
Journal of Food Science and Technology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2017-11-02
Volume
55
Issue
1
Pages
10-20
ISSN
  • 0022-1155 (ISSN-L)
  • 0975-8402
DOI
10.1007/s13197-017-2915-y
OpenAlex
W2765300717
Cited by
469
References
55
FWCI
23.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (unspecified)
Funders
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

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: How well do plant based alternatives fare nutritionally compared to cow’s milk? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s13197-017-2915-y
The paper
Vanga, S. K., & Raghavan, V. (2018). How well do plant based alternatives fare nutritionally compared to cow’s milk? Journal of Food Science and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-017-2915-y

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.