Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 334

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 120 of the 120 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Classification and antioxidant assays of polyphenols: a review

Open access
Lang, Yuxi, Gao, Ningxuan, Zang, Zhihuan, Meng, Xianjun, Lin, Yang, Yang, Shufang, Yang, Yiyun, Jin, Zhufeng, Li, Bin·2024·Journal of Future Foods

Abstract

Polyphenols are widely recognized as the effective antioxidants, which are divided into flavonoids, phenolic acids, stilbenes, lignans, tannins and so on. They could regulate internal functions and protect the body from diseases related to oxidative damage. Due to the fact that their antioxidant capacity is influenced by the structure, stability and bioavailability, the detection of their bioactivity should be considered comprehensively. Currently, the methods for measuring the antioxidant capacity of phenolic compounds are divided into chemical, cell-based and in vivo assays. The chemical assays include 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH), 2,2′-azinobis-(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) (ABTS), ferric reducing /antioxidant power (FRAP), oxygen radical absorbance capacity (ORAC), peroxyl radical scavenging capacity (PSC), which are rapid identification method, but their reaction mechanism has a great gap with the internal body response. The cell-based assays are more consistent with biological reaction, but still do not take the bioavailability into consideration. The in vivo assays, which commonly utilized Caenorhabditis elegans or rats as models, are more representative, but these methods are more complex and spend longer. This review summarizes the antioxidant evaluation methods of phenolic compounds and discusses their advantages and limitations comparatively, which could help discriminate and select the appropriate assay in the actual operation, and facilitate the development of comprehensive approaches as well.

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 · 10.1016/j.jfutfo.2023.07.002

Cites

120 of 120 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 120 references

Metadata

Authors
Lang, Y., Gao, N., Zang, Z., Meng, X., Lin, Y., Yang, S., Yang, Y., Jin, Z., & Li, B.
Venue
Journal of Future Foods
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-09
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
193-204
ISSN
2772-5669 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4386940567
Cited by
334
References
120
FWCI
32.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
diamond

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: Classification and antioxidant assays of polyphenols: a review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jfutfo.2023.07.002
The paper
Lang, Y., Gao, N., Zang, Z., Meng, X., Lin, Y., Yang, S., Yang, Y., Jin, Z., & Li, B. (2024). Classification and antioxidant assays of polyphenols: a review. Journal of Future Foods. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfutfo.2023.07.002

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.