Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 447

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reducing meat consumption and following plant-based diets: Current evidence and future directions to inform integrated transitions

Open access
Graça, João, Godinho, Cristina A., Truninger, Monica·2019·Trends in Food Science & Technology

Abstract

Abstract Background There is increasing consensus that transitioning towards reduced meat consumption and more plant-based diets is a key feature to address important health and sustainability challenges. However, relevant evidence that may inform these transitions remains fragmented with no overarching rationale or theoretical framework, which limits the ability to design and deliver coordinated efforts to address these challenges. Scope and approach Eleven databases were systematically searched using sets of keywords referring meat curtailment, meat substitution and plant-based diets, as well as consumer choice, appraisal or behavior (2602 articles selected for title and abstract screening; 161 full-texts assessed for eligibility; 110 articles selected for extraction and coding). Barriers and enablers were identified and integrated into an overarching framework (i.e., COM-B system), which conceptualizes behavior as being influenced by three broad components: capability, opportunity and motivation. Key findings and conclusions This review mapped potential barriers and enablers in terms of capability, opportunity, and motivation to reduce meat consumption and follow more plant-based diets. These included lack of information for consumers and difficulty to acquire new cooking skills (barrier, capability), changes in service provision in collective meal contexts (enabler, opportunity), and positive taste expectations for plant-based meals (enabler, motivation). Evidence on variables referring to the motivation domain is clearly increasing, but there is a striking need for studies that include capability and opportunity variables as well. The results of this review are relevant to a variety of fields and audiences interested in promoting sustainable living and health improvements through dietary choice.

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.tifs.2019.07.046

Cites

11 of 11 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 11 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Graça, J., Godinho, C. A., & Truninger, M.
Venue
Trends in Food Science & Technology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-09
Volume
91
Pages
380-390
ISSN
0924-2244 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2966376844
Cited by
447
References
11
FWCI
23.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

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.