Next Article in Journal
Enhancement of Skin Anti-Wrinkling Effects of Arthrospira maxima Phycocynobilin by Combining with Wheat Bran Extract
Previous Article in Journal
Regular and Chaotic Vibrations of a Nonlinear Rotor-Stator System
Previous Article in Special Issue
Chemical and Sensory Properties of Corn Extrudates Enriched with Tomato Powder and Ascorbic Acid
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Systematic Review

A Systematic Review of the Twelve Most Popular Bean Varieties, Highlighting Their Potential as Functional Foods Based on the Health Benefits Derived from Their Nutritional Profiles, Focused on Non-Communicable Diseases

1
Department of Agriculture Crop Production and Rural Environment, School of Agriculture Sciences, University of Thessaly, 38446 Volos, Greece
2
Laboratory of Food and Agricultural Industries Technologies, Chemical Engineering Department, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14(22), 10215; https://doi.org/10.3390/app142210215
Submission received: 26 September 2024 / Revised: 24 October 2024 / Accepted: 25 October 2024 / Published: 7 November 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Enrichment of Foods with Phytonutrients)

Abstract

:
According to the US Department of Agriculture, more than 4000 types of beans are cultivated in the United States and worldwide; nevertheless, the demand for beans continues to rise. To some extent, diet can treat inflammation and consequently reduce the chances of developing comorbidities, such as diabetes. A diet based on alternative plant protein sources, such as beans, is a sustainable solution for overall health due to the overconsumption of meat that characterizes Western societies and is even more important for regions that suffer from malnutrition, such as Africa. Reviewing the nutritional profile of the different varieties of beans produced in various locations would help enhance their quality, strengthen the role of producer groups, and protecting Geographical Indications (GI), thereby increasing simplification, sustainability, and transparency towards consumers. PubMed-Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant articles published by 30 March 2024. The results have given the green light to the reform of EFSA rules, strengthening the health claims of beans, protecting the GI for each variety, and also highlighting the public demands for functional foods based on the nutritional aspects of this product and its impact on disease management or prevention.

1. Introduction

Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) kill 41 million each year, equivalent to 74% of all deaths globally. An estimated 80% of NCDs, such as type 2 diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, and certain types of cancers, are preventable [1]. To some extent, diet can treat the inflammation that may underlie many of them and consequently minimize the risk of NCDs.
Most researchers have characterized the Mediterranean diet as an “anti-inflammatory diet” [2]. It is a diet that includes fiber and saturated/unsaturated fatty acid profiles while limiting the consumption of foods with many additives. Legumes are a plant source of protein and have a prominent place in the pyramid of the Mediterranean diet because they are based on fiber, which benefits gut health [3]. Recent studies showed that the pigments in colored beans contain anti-inflammatory and antioxidant compounds that can help prevent cancer, heart disease [4], obesity, and diabetes [5]. Especially black beans, which provide almost the same amount of protein as an egg, offer 8 g of protein per serving (1/2 cup) of cooked food. They are a plant-based protein with beneficial effects on, people who suffer from cardiovascular disease and vegans [6]. The proper combination of plant-based protein sources, which are complete as concerns essential amino acids, could also offer a solution to the malnutrition population worldwide by using proprietary technologies and leveraging expertise in protein science [7].
Dry beans and pulses also have high concentrations of prebiotics [8]. Another bioactive compound is a trypsin inhibitor that plays a role in hormones that control energy balance [9]. Additionally, consumers are searching for foods with health claims [10]. Functional foods promise wellness and healthy aging [11]. However, dietitians should combine the new trend with nutritional advice for each person and each condition according to their recommendations based on individual needs and preferences [12]. Beans can play a role in creating tailored dietary solutions [13] based on people’s acceptance [14] and their components, such as non-digestible oligosaccharides, prebiotics, etc. [8].
Self-sufficiency in grain legumes for both food and feed can be widely attained with a cultivation area 5.5 times larger than the current [15]. Technically speaking, beans are members of the legume family, meaning they grow in a pod [16]. The United States is a net exporter of more than 4000 types of beans [17]. Common beans are an inexpensive source of high-quality food ingredients, and not many researchers focused on their micronutrient profile [18,19,20,21,22] according to their type nor on their possible support of a healthy weight, reduction of heart disease, diabetes, and certain types of cancer [23]. This review aspires to fill the gap in the literature and also link the science of nutrition with the medical and technological aspects in order to inspire food scientists towards the development of new products (bread, pasta, cake, etc.) based on beans with health claims. Except for the health claims, some beans, such as pinto beans, black beans, or kidney beans, have the overall acceptance of consumers [23].
Assessing the nutritional profiles of various bean varieties grown in different locations would help identify differences, enabling better comparison of the nutritional quality of products on the market. This would also strengthen the role of producer groups, protect geographical indications (GIs), and enhance simplification, sustainability, and transparency for consumers. Following the EU Parliament’s final approval of the reform of the EU regulations to strengthen the protection of geographical indications (GIs) for agricultural products [24], this article emphasizes the specificity of each variety. It addresses not only their nutritional aspects but also their specific health benefits, in line with public demand for functional foods. The aim of this review was to assess the impact of the nutrients and nutritional components of twelve bean varieties on overall health.

2. Methods

A review was undertaken to explore the current knowledge regarding the nutritional profiles and intervention strategies associated with the consumption of various types of beans, as well as the benefits recommended by health professionals for individuals with unhealthy diets. This study has inclusive criteria as concern epidemiology data (all age groups, ethnicities, and socio-economic status), design of the studies (controlled trials, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, and systematic reviews but also with emphasis on randomization, variability of the used questionnaires, sample size), and excluded criteria were the narrative reviews, studies with limited sizes, and concerns about risk of bias. The search strategy involved a comprehensive examination of the following databases:
PubMed searches utilized MeSH terms, specifically targeting “#Beans”, “#Types”, “#Diet”, “#Nutritional profile”, “#Nutrients”, and “#Bioactive compounds”. The aim was to uncover the relationship between the nutritional profiles of different bean types, with a particular focus on micronutrients and macronutrients. Initial search results yielded 147 articles, with 7 duplicates removed, resulting in 140 articles for further analysis.
Searches in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library focused on identifying articles related to “#Beans”, “#Bioactive compounds”, “#Health benefits”, ‘’ #NCDs’’, “#Cardiovascular disease”, “#Diabetes mellitus”, “#Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease”, “#Obesity”, “#Nutrition”, and “#Diet”. Additional keywords such as “#Food” and “#Nutrition” were included. The criteria aimed to gain insights into dietary habits, interventions, and the role of different bean varieties in addressing the interplay with specific bioactive compounds and disorders. Initial search results yielded 180 articles, with 6 duplicates removed, leaving 174 articles for detailed scrutiny. A comprehensive depiction of this selection process is delineated in the accompanying PRISMA 2020 flow-diagram (version 2020) (Figure 1), with the same methodology of a previous study [4].
The Cochrane Library search emphasized “#Beans”, “#Diet”, “#Nutrition”, “#Side Effects”, and “#Evidence-Based Interventions”, with an additional keyword “#Food”. The aim was to identify articles exploring the association between bean consumption and negative symptoms, with a specific focus on the guidance provided by health professionals. Initially, 9 articles were retrieved, and 5 duplicates were eliminated, resulting in 4 articles for thorough review.
The selection of these databases was based on their reputability, comprehensiveness, and relevance to healthcare and research (Table 1).

3. Results

Legumes are the food category that includes beans, which are the seeds from flowering plants in the Fabaceae family [24]. The food industry processes them in order to extend their self-life, and some types are commercially available dry, canned, or frozen. Nutritionally, some varieties are consumed whole, including the pod [16].
Focusing on the nutritional value of proteins from legumes, especially regarding the composition of essential and non-essential amino acids [25], soybeans outweigh the protein content compared with the other types and the possible effects of their consumption [26]. Some of the most popular bean varieties include common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris), chickpea (Cicer arietinum), lentil (Lens culinaris), fava bean (Vicia faba), mung bean (Vigna radiata), soybean (Glycine max), common pea (Pisum sativum), pigeon pea or pigeon bean (Cajanus cajan), black-eyed pea (Vigna unguiculata), and lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus) [23]. There are also many varieties of common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris), such as kidney beans, black beans, navy beans, pinto beans, and Great Northern beans [27] (Figure 2). To become tender enough for consumption, dried beans require cooking [28]. The food technology gave the opportunity of on-the-go consumption for many of them [29].

3.1. Nutritional Profile

This review analyzes the nutritional profiles of the seven most popular bean varieties based on recent literature [23] and also the five most cultivated varieties of common beans of the genus Phaseolus vulgaris [27], since many of them are widely cultivated in Greece [24].

Common Beans Consumed Worldwide

  • Black beans (Phaseolus vulgaris);
  • Κidney beans (Phaseolus vulgaris);
  • Navy beans (Phaseolus vulgaris);
  • Pinto beans (Phaseolus vulgaris);
  • Great Northern beans (Phaseolus vulgaris);
  • Black-eyed beans (Vigna unguiculata);
  • Lima beans (Phaseolus lunatus);
  • Soybeans (Glycine max);
  • Garbanzo beans (Cicer arietinum L.);
  • Fava bean (Vicia faba);
  • Mung beans (Vigna radiata);
  • Azuki bean or red bean (Vigna angularis) [30]
The following are the nutrition facts for 100 g dry weight mass and cooked (boiled without salt) per variety of beans. The results obtained from red and black beans showed an increase in carbohydrate (64.16 to 71.56%), energy value (29.68 to 36.27%), and fiber (4.62 to 6.05%), followed by a reduction in protein (4.62 to 6.05%), and fat (4.62 to 6.05%) [18,19,21,24,28,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45], as shown in the Table 2, but also in vitamins and minerals.
Research has demonstrated significant variations in the nutrient composition among different types of beans. Soybeans, according to the health claims of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), are rich in protein content and low in saturated fats [37]. Protein content ranges from the lowest of 16.59 g/100 g (black-eyed beans) to a maximum of 36.49 g/100 g (soybeans). Carbohydrate content ranges from the lowest of 23 g/100 g (Great Northern beans) to a maximum of 72.75 g/100 g (Lima beans). Fat content ranges from the lowest of 0.5 mg/100 g as a cooked form of Adzuki beans to a maximum of 2.59 mg/100 g as a cooked form of Garbanzo beans. Cooking affects the bioactive compounds of beans [46]. Environmental factors like canopy biomass, pod harvest index, and yield components may also affect the nutritional quality traits of navy beans [47]. Regardless of the external factors that play an important role in the nutrition profile, the highest protein content and antioxidant activity of soybeans offer the best quality [48]. However, protein content alone is not enough to justify a high nutritional value claim. The composition of proteins in terms of essential and non-essential amino acids is of crucial importance. In general, proteins from plants from this family are considered incomplete, which is typical for plant-derived proteins. However, there are some exceptions, like soybeans and kidney beans [49]. For example, soybeans have an almost ideal amino acid composition, and their protein is considered complete, comparable to animal-derived proteins. Conversely, common beans are relatively low in vitamins A and C [18,19,20,21,22,27,30,31,37,38,40,41,42,45,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58] (Table 3).
Niacin exhibits the highest concentration in dry seeds, ranging from 0.51 to 3.2 mg per 100 g. Thiamine follows, with a range of 0.04 to 2.4 mg, and riboflavin with 3.5 to 12.3 mg. Vitamin B6 ranges from 0.054 to 4.28 mg, while vitamin B9 varies from 58 to 557 μg [59]. Apart from their high amount of vitamins (B1, B2, B3, C, E, etc.), beans are characterized by also high amount of minerals [19,22,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,44,45,57,58,60,61] (Table 4).
Beans could be characterized as functional foods according to their amount of linoleic acid and linolenic acid [62], with special reference to fava beans [63]. At the same time, beans don’t increase cholesterol levels [64]. However, the most significant discovery is that their distinctive combination of plant protein and dietary fibers provides them with both functional and bioactive properties [63]. This combination, which is characteristic especially for the red kidney bean [65] and pinto beans [66], may play a role as a potential mechanism for lowering total serum cholesterol or reducing postprandial glucose elevation in both diabetic and nondiabetic participants [49]. Except from their macronutrient and micronutrient profile, beans have a high content of phytochemicals [67,68] that enhance overall health [59].

3.2. Health Benefits

3.2.1. Cardiovascular Disease

People who regularly eat beans may have a lower risk of dying from a heart attack or other cardiovascular problems. Replacement of meat products with beans as a protein source leads to decreased intake of sulphur-containing amino acids, like methionine and cysteine. Lower methionine in turn leads to a lower level of homocysteine in the blood. High levels of homocysteine have been linked to early development of heart disease. Due to their high protein content, legumes are the first choice [19] in minimizing cardiovascular risk [69] or high blood pressure [19]. Beans are one of the best sources of soluble fiber, which naturally lowers cholesterol levels, according to the National Lipid Association [70]. Although soybeans and other varieties have a very low total fat content, daily consumption of soybeans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) as a meal with 180 g of canned beans and 90 g of cooked rice in combination with 180 g of white rice lowers cholesterol levels due to the high fiber content [71]. These little powerhouses are also rich in potassium, a mineral that is important for regulating blood pressure. According to the latest survey by the National Institutes of Health, few people consume sufficient amounts of this essential mineral [72].

3.2.2. Cancer

Eight studies included in this review have shown that beans are rich in antioxidants that protect from oxidative stress and inflammation. Verbascose from mung beans (Phaseolus aureus) exhibited potent immunostimulatory activity and was suggested as a potential natural immunomodulatory agent in functional foods [73]. The inverse associations of bean consumption with breast cancer were stronger with a higher intake of beans combined with grains such as bread [74]. In 2015, Moreno-Jiménez et al. conducted an analysis to investigate whether beans lower the risk of intestinal cancer [46], with black beans possible prevention of colorectal cancer by impeding cancer cell proliferation [75]. One potential explanation for this effect is the elevated concentration of polyphenols, a type of antioxidant, with black beans demonstrating higher antioxidant activity [46]. Antioxidants play a crucial role in neutralizing the effects of free radicals [76]. Beans aid in eliminating free radicals from the body, thereby helping to protect against diseases. Notably, according to the latest study by Baxter et al. (2019), consuming 35 g/day of navy beans was found to be beneficial [77], a finding consistent with the results of Borresen et al. (2016) concerning colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors [78].

3.2.3. Diabetes Mellitus

From 78 studies, only 10 were randomized control trials that evaluated the specific varieties of beans and their impact on glucose control in diabetes patients. Beans may help reduce steep post-prandial glucose levels [79]. The explanation of these metabolic benefits is their high content of fibers that range from 4.6 g in fava beans up to 9.6 g fiber in navy beans and 6.2 g in 100 g cooked chickpeas [80]. These ingredients may lead to a lower risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus [81]. EFSA considers a daily intake of 25 g or more dietary fiber sufficient in reducing the complications of diabetes mellitus [82] and may help regulate post-prandial glucose levels [83]. Reverri et al. (2015) demonstrated in patients with metabolic syndrome, including diabetes, that meals containing black beans led to reduced postprandial insulin concentrations [84], and that could happen even with 100 g of legumes in the daily diet of people with type 2 diabetes [85]. The PREDIMED study [85] results were the same as the last study of Mirmiran et al. (2019). In a randomized controlled study where participants consumed one serving of legumes per day [86], it was observed that those who consumed beans experienced a reduction in blood sugar levels and lower blood pressure compared to the control group, which consumed more whole wheat fiber. In addition to the recommended daily intake of 40 g of dietary fiber [87], another important consideration for individuals with prediabetes, type 1 diabetes, or type 2 diabetes is the glycemic index (GI) of foods [88]. Among legumes, soybeans have the lowest GI (16 ± 1%), followed by beans (GI 24 ± 4%), chickpeas (GI 28 ± 9%), and lentils (GI 32 ± 5%) [89].
In a study by Kazemi et al. (2018), which examined pinto, black, and kidney beans at a dose of 225 g/day in individuals with diabetes, it was found that could help in glucose stability [90]. Increasing fiber intake (15 g to 30 g/day) is a usual recommendation for diabetics [91] and is necessary as part of dietetic diabetic management. Possible mechanisms involved in blood glucose homeostasis regulation include phytolectins, phytates, and amylase inhibitors, which play crucial roles in diabetes management [92].
Furthermore, the mechanism may be linked to the reduction of TNF-α and IL-6, as well as lower post-prandial insulin levels in patients who received products derived from Adzuki beans for 4 weeks [93].

3.2.4. Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD)

Usual comorbidity with T2DM is NAFLD and requires the same treatment as concerned lifestyle changes and regular controlling lipidemic profile changes and blood pressure [94]. Replacing high-fat animal proteins with beans is a good step towards better liver health [95]. In a cross-sectional study of 136 subjects, a significant inverse association was found between chickpea consumption and NAFLD severity [96]. In 2020, published the latest comprehensive guidelines on diet and liver disease, recommended at least 450 g of legumes per week (about 2 cans of chickpeas) [97].

3.2.5. Obesity

83 studies from the Web of Science and 6 from PubMed were the initial search results, but only 8 were assessed after the eligibility check. The fiber and healthy starches contained in beans can reduce appetite [98]. As a long-term dietary strategy, this could help prevent overeating and lead to weight loss, according to Papanikolaou (2023), who showed that higher consumption of dried and/or canned beans is associated with a normal weight [99]. Numerous studies found a link between non-digestible oligosaccharides and protein consumption with a healthier body mass index (BMI) [100,101]. In addition, participants in a study who incorporated four servings of cooked legumes per week into a low-fat, high-fiber (>25 g/day) diet for 12 months lost more weight [102]. More recently, a study of 15,185 people found that those who consumed beans can contribute to gaining less weight and abdominal fat over a ten-year period than those who did not [103]. A weight reduction of 2.24 kg (average 0.448 kg per week) was observed with an amount of 2400 mg/day of white kidney bean extract before each daily meal for 35 consecutive days [104].
This weight loss was consistent with that observed in a previous study over a 12-week duration, which utilized a portion of 500 mg/day and resulted in an average weight decrease of 2.91 kg [105]. The effects of Adzuki bean products on body weight control have been studied, revealing three main impacts: decreased food intake, increased energy expenditure, and reduced adipose tissue (Table 5) [45].

3.2.6. Other Health Effects

In recent years, enough evidence has accumulated to show a close relationship between gut microbiota and metabolic syndrome (e.g., obesity). The findings of Monk et al. have shown that different types of beans, especially black beans, improve gut health by the mechanism described in Figure 3 [106]. This can help prevent gut-associated diseases [107]. They also support the function of the immune system and can promote weight loss [108]. The results show that feeding beans [109] and mung beans [110] to mice alters the colonic microenvironment (microbiota and host epithelial barrier) and reduces the risk of obesity by increasing Akkermansia muciniphila [109]. Furthermore, the Mediterranean diet influenced the gut microbiota diversity in adult volunteers who adhered more strictly to this eating pattern compared to those with lower adherence. Specifically, the Butyricimonas, Desulfovibrio, and Oscillospira genera were more commonly associated with a BMI of less than 25 [111]. The potential mechanism of bean bioactive compounds on gut microbiota and obesity has been studied by Nicolás-García et al. [112] and by Cao et al. [113] (Figure 3), but Beane et al. (2021) described gut microbiome impact on overall health [114].

3.3. Side Effects

People already sensitive to chickpeas and soybeans may develop allergic reactions when using these products [115] and should exercise caution when eating other types [116]. Anaphylaxis is a severe allergic reaction to the lectins of beans [117]. Soaking, cooking, and fermenting beans improves bioavailability [118]. Beans should be cooked for at least 10 min to be safe [29]. Another usual effect of eating beans is flatulence, but soaking and cooking reduce enzyme inhibitor levels [115]. Another category of people who should reduce bean consumption [119] or even accept beans from their nutrition are people with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) [120]. Eating beans in the form of beans and black beans reduces inflammation and epithelial damage in the colon associated with colitis [121]. Low-FODMAP diet [122] could be a solution to IBD’s symptoms [123].

4. Discussion

The role of lifestyle, particularly dietary behavior, is crucial in the prevention and management of cardiovascular disease (CVD), type 2 diabetes mellitus, obesity, and related health problems [2]. This review focuses on two aspects: nutritional differences between the different bean varieties and their impact on disease prevention or/and treatment (Figure 1). In terms of nutritional profile, beans are an excellent source of protein as well as fiber, folate, potassium, iron, and zinc. For an average adult, the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) for protein, i.e., the amount you need to meet your basic nutritional needs and not get sick, is 0.8 g of protein per kilogram of body weight [124]. For a person weighing 75 kg (165 pounds), that comes to 60 g of protein per day.
A good example of a meal that provides 100% daily value magnesium and 30 g protein is a salad with 2 cups of chickpeas, ¼ cup of soybeans, 3 cups of green leafy vegetables, and ½ avocado [29]. The combination of grains and beans is common because they offer a perfect amino acid composition and their protein is considered complete, like animal-derived proteins [125]. This is also useful for a person who follows a plant-based diet or can be utilized without mixing in gluten-free products [126].
Regarding the other micronutrients of beans, we took into consideration the latest WHO daily dietary recommendations [87].
Comparing these recommendations with data from Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4, it is concluded that 100 g of most varieties is enough to cover 30% of most of the macronutrients and micronutrient intake recommendations and the goals are fully achieved through the consumption of beans as suggested by the traditional Mediterranean diet combined with other plant-based sources. Different mung bean products (100 g) cover 12% of protein needs and almost 5% of the recommended dietary allowance for iron, zinc, and calcium for kids [127]. Finally, vegan diet patterns should not be recommended for pregnant women [128].
The soybean is undoubtedly one of the healthiest types of bean. According to research from 2021 [35], they are one of the few plant foods that provide a high-quality complete protein comparable to that of animal foods. Although fava beans have a similar protein content, their effects on body composition, especially in terms of weight loss and physical condition, are not equivalent [129]. The essential amino acid composition of beans compared to animal protein sources is crucial for their recognition as a sustainable nutritional solution. The lowest total concentration of essential amino acids was found in pinto beans, with most varieties having similar characteristics [130]. In addition, kidney beans and pinto beans were found to have the highest lysine content at 537 mg and 538 mg per 0.5 g cup serving, respectively [49]. Regarding the phaseolin protein fraction of beans, soybeans had the highest prolamine content but the lowest albumin fraction, while the opposite trend was observed in mung beans [34]. In contrast, kidney bean seeds contain various antinutritive factors such as phytohemagglutinin, trypsin inhibitor, saponin, urease, genistein, alkaloids, cyanogenic glycosides, goitrogen, polyphenolic compounds (tannins), oxalates, phytates, oligosaccharides, and antigenic proteins [131].
The micronutrient composition of common beans in a 100 g edible portion distinguishes black beans for their higher concentration of potassium and kidney beans for their higher iron content. However, the dry form of beans contains a threefold concentration of all micronutrients compared to the cooked form [19]. Incorporating beans into one’s diet, including canned beans, daily is considered one of the most effective ways to increase nutrient intake and significantly improve dietary quality [132]. Potassium, magnesium, and phosphorus are not the only essential elements in beans; even after cooking, the Lima variety (Phaseolus lunatus) retains higher concentrations of these minerals [33]. Population-level data suggests that current magnesium intake levels are insufficient among a significant portion of adults, making it essential to consume more dietary magnesium to reduce insulin resistance and the risk of future diabetes and fatty liver disease, particularly for those with existing metabolic abnormalities [125].
The high potassium and low sodium content of beans is beneficial for people with hypertension [33], and a diet high in potassium may be protective, especially for people with renal insufficiency, which is often cited as a complication of type 2 diabetes [133]. In addition, common beans can help counteract the risk of calcium deficiency commonly seen in older adults [134]. Folate is also important for overall health as it contributes to the formation of healthy red blood cells and prevents neural tube defects in fetuses during pregnancy [135]. A 1-cup serving of common beans provides about 482 micrograms (mcg) of folate [19].
Apart from the minerals, the vitamin content varies depending on the type of bean varieties, and the processing of beans decreases their total content [33]. According to dietary guidelines, most people are also deficient in folate, calcium, magnesium, fiber, and vitamins A, C, D, and E (as well as iron for women of childbearing age) [136]. Beans can help fill these nutrient gaps; research shows that Americans who include beans in their diets tend to consume more fiber, potassium, calcium, folate, iron, magnesium, and vitamin E than non-bean eaters [99].
Canned beans are convenient and pre-cooked, so they can be easily integrated into various dishes without additional preparation. However, it’s important to check the label before buying canned beans, as some varieties can have a high salt content. Typical brine formulas for canned beans contain about 2–3% (w/v) salt and 3–6% (w/v) sugar [126]. Following EFSA’s emphasis on the gastrointestinal effects of beans [110], individuals may want to experiment with different types of beans. Although the 2020–2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommend consuming 1½ cups of cooked beans per week [137], research indicates that most Americans consume less than 1/3 cup per week [23]. In Greece, dietary guidelines recommend the consumption of 2 cups of cooked beans per week [131], and Greek consumers typically exceed this recommendation and consume more legumes but also more meat, which correlates with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and certain cancers [138]. This overconsumption, combined with the consumption of ultra-processed foods, can lead to diseases such as obesity [139]. Additionally, research suggests that by consuming just one extra serving of vegetables or legumes per day, the risk of long-term illness could be reduced by up to 14% [140]. An explanation of the potential biochemical pathways through which beans exert their health benefits is the fiber’s role in cholesterol reduction and polyphenols’ antioxidant properties [114]. However, beans cause severe flatulence, especially chickpeas and kidney beans [115].
For disease management (Table 5), vegetarian dietary patterns, including the consumption of beans, are recommended for reducing dietary fats and cholesterol while promoting cardiovascular health through fiber, antioxidants, and phytochemicals [19]. One possible mechanism is the reduction in serum total and LDL cholesterol observed in adults with elevated LDL cholesterol who consume beans [71]. However, in adults with established CVD, vegetarian diets did not significantly affect various parameters compared to non-vegetarian diets [141]. Soybeans, with their higher isoflavone content (0.2 to 1.6 mg/g dry weight) compared to other varieties [142], may play a role in managing CVD by increasing essential nutrient intake or reducing cholesterol [143]. New systematic reviews have examined the effects of legume consumption on markers of glycemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus, reporting reductions in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), 2-h postprandial glucose, and fasting blood glucose [144].
Observational studies suggest that vegetarian and vegan dietary patterns may reduce the risk of certain diseases. A review of 83 studies published from 2014 to March 2024 found moderate-certainty evidence of a reduction in the incidence of cardiovascular disease from eating beans. Low and very low-certainty evidence indicated potential benefits, such as reduced mortality from cardiovascular disease, blood pressure, blood lipids, BMI, and C-reactive protein [74]. There is growing evidence that bean consumption can reduce the risk of fatty liver disease and reduce enzyme and fat storage in people with pre-existing conditions, particularly from soy protein [145]. On the other hand, vegetarian and especially vegan diets have been associated with lower vitamin B12 and vitamin D concentrations [146].
Another study demonstrated the positive effects of bean intake in reducing BMI and fasting blood glucose levels [147]. Mung bean extracts have been found to have beneficial effects on lipid and metabolic profiles at a dose of 3 g [148], while white kidney bean supplementation at a dose of 2.4 g in clinical trials resulted in significant weight loss (approximately 0.5 lb per week), possibly by preventing the digestion of complex carbohydrates and reducing the absorption of carbohydrate calories [104]. Furthermore, supplementation with soluble dietary fibers from black beans at 4.2 g per 100 g for 12 weeks has been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease and provide definitive evidence of weight reduction in overweight and obese patients [149]. For individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus, beans included in a narrative review were considered a helpful strategy for reversing prediabetes to normoglycemia as part of the Food Pyramid and showed benefits in reducing HbA1c and BMI, although evidence regarding the need for diabetes medication was mixed [150]. The nutritional profile of beans, such as vitamin C, may help reduce serum levels of fasting blood glucose, fasting insulin, and HbA1c in patients with type 2 diabetes, while polyphenols have the potential to reduce oxidative stress [151].
Recent studies have linked fermented foods, such as a Japanese soy dish, to brain growth. This is another reason for scientists to investigate the role of fermented foods in human health and the maintenance of a healthy gut microbiome [152]. Future research directions could focus on demonstrating the effectiveness of different bean varieties in the prevention and treatment of disease and making health claims, with the limitations of the evidence since observational studies may show correlations but not causation. Large-scale, high-quality studies are needed to better understand the effects of a plant-based diet, particularly bean consumption, on overall health. Functional food ingredients from beans are promising for the food industry as they can be used to produce dairy and meat alternatives [153].
On the other hand, more than 2 billion people have micronutrient deficiencies [154]. Fortified foods can be a solution for high-index quality nutrition [155]. Many bakery products or pastries are enriched with beans (Phaseolus vurgaris L.) or their extractions rich in PUFAS and tocopherols [156]. The nutritional profile of wheat bread could be optimized with alternative sources of bioactive compounds, such as beans, and obtained the title “novel fortified foods” [155].
The most recent study reveals that fortified bread with bean flour could affect consumer acceptance due to the masking of ‘beany flavor’ and may contribute to minimizing malnutrition, as noted in the minor changes in protein conformational elements at the final product [157]. Chickpea flour, red kidney bean flour [158], or mung flour [159] is used to improve phytochemical content, and fava flour to improve protein [160] or fiber content in bread making [161]. Also, Italian pasta uses alternatives such as bean flour to improve glucose regulation [162]. Additionally, beans by-products can also take part in the food industry of baking and pastry products and enhance the circular economy for a sustainable future [163].
Not only for their nutritional value but also for their functionality, many manufacturers label their biscuits with claims such as products for children who suffer from malnutrition [164] when they add beans as novel ingredients. Others focused on diabetic snack bars with clinical trials for better postprandial glucose responses after consumption of a soybean nutrition bar either in healthy adults [165] or in diabetes [166]. Additionally, fortifying snack bars, bread, or other baking products using bean flour has successfully reduced the incidence of celiac disease, wheat allergy, gluten sensitivity, or non-celiac gluten [167]. Finally, further study is needed in order to give the characterization of diabetic products or the health claim of weight loss [162]. However, this study acknowledges certain limitations, including variations in intervention duration and methodology, as discussed elsewhere.

5. Conclusions

Beans provide protein, fiber, iron, and antioxidants that can make them a healthy addition to the diet. Bean consumption should be increased gradually to reduce the risk of intestinal discomfort. All types of beans have not similar nutrient content, and significant changes have been found when they are cooked. Black beans, pinto beans, soybeans, and fava beans have more vitamin C, kidney beans supply iron, and Adzuki beans have more potassium. Of all types, soybeans could be characterized as a superfood. Consuming beans according to dietary guideline recommendations as part of a well-designed personalized eating plan can lower fasting blood glucose, blood pressure, and cholesterol levels, and the longer-term consequences of these effects on well-being have been demonstrated. This review suggests that increased consumption of beans may contribute to the prevention and/or treatment of obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and certain cancers. Further studies are needed to determine the mechanism for maximizing the health benefits of novel products based on beans that could be a call for action for sustainability.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, O.G. and M.D.; methodology, O.G. and M.D.; software, M.D.; validation, O.G., P.V. and M.D.; formal analysis, M.D.; investigation, O.G. and M.D.; resources, O.G. and M.D.; data curation, M.D.; writing—original draft preparation, M.D.; writing—review and editing, O.G., M.D. and P.V.; visualization, P.V.; supervision, O.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Budreviciute, A.; Damiati, S.; Sabir, D.K.; Onder, K.; Schuller-Goetzburg, P.; Plakys, G.; Katileviciute, A.; Khoja, S.; Kodzius, R. Management and prevention strategies for non-communicable diseases (NCDs) ant their risk factors. Front. Public Health 2020, 8, 574111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Hansbro, P. The Good Gut Anti-Inflammatory Diet: Beat Whole Body Inflammation and Live Longer, Happier, Healthier and Younger; Pantera Press: Sydney, Australia, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bell, S.J.; Bouffard, R.P.; Wijendran, V.; Bauer, K.; Marsland, C. The Anti-Inflammatory Diet: What To Consider. Nutr. Perspect. J. Counc. Nutr. 2019, 42, 26–46. [Google Scholar]
  4. Serventi, L.; Serventi, L.; Dsouza, L.V. Bioactives in legumes. In Upcycling Legume Water: From Wastewater to Food Ingredients; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020; pp. 139–153. [Google Scholar]
  5. Moreno-Valdespino, C.A.; Luna-Vital, D.; Camacho-Ruiz, R.M.; Mojica, L. Bioactive proteins and phytochemicals from legumes: Mechanisms of action preventing obesity and type-2 diabetes. Food Res. Int. 2020, 130, 108905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Wharton, J. Bean Briefs. Top. Clin. Nutr. 2011, 26, 208–215. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bossi, D.S.D.; Saah, M.B.D.; Njapndounké, B.; Ngoufack, F.Z. Nutritional evaluation, oxidative indexes, and functional properties of Irish potatoes, eggs, and red kidney beans based complementary food. N. Afr. J. Food Nutr. Res. 2023, 7, 20–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Wiesinger, J.A.; Marsolais, F.; Glahn, R.P. Health Implications and Nutrient Bioavailability of Bioactive Compounds in Dry Beans and Other Pulses. In Dry Beans and Pulses; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2022; pp. 505–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Cristina Oliveira de Lima, V.; Piuvezam, G.; Leal Lima Maciel, B.; Heloneida de Araújo Morais, A. Trypsin inhibitors: Promising candidate satietogenic proteins as complementary treatment for obesity and metabolic disorders? J. Enzym. Inhib. Med. Chem. 2019, 34, 405–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Gupta, A.; Sanwal, N.; Bareen, M.A.; Barua, S.; Sharma, N.; Olatunji, O.J.; Nirmal, N.P.; Sahu, J.K. Trends in functional beverages: Functional ingredients, processing technologies, stability, health benefits, and consumer perspective. Food Res. Int. 2023, 170, 113046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Tarabella, A.; Tarabella, A.; Varese, E.; Buffagni, S. Functional foods. In Food Products Evolution: Innovation Drivers and Market Trends; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 117–142. [Google Scholar]
  12. Boland, M.; Alam, F.; Bronlund, J. Modern technologies for personalized nutrition. In Trends in Personalized Nutrition; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2019; pp. 195–222. [Google Scholar]
  13. Boukid, F. Plant-based meat analogues: From niche to mainstream. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2021, 247, 297–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Peschel, A.O.; Kazemi, S.; Liebichová, M.; Sarraf, S.C.M.; Aschemann-Witzel, J. Consumers’ associative networks of plant-based food product communications. Food Qual. Prefer. 2019, 75, 145–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. van Loon, M.P.; Alimagham, S.; Pronk, A.; Fodor, N.; Ion, V.; Kryvoshein, O.; Kryvobok, O.; Marrou, H.; Mihail, R.; Mínguez, M.I. Grain legume production in Europe for food, feed and meat-substitution. Glob. Food Secur. 2023, 39, 100723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Siddiq, M.; Uebersax, M.A.; Siddiq, F. Global production, trade, processing and nutritional profile of dry beans and other pulses. In Dry Beans and Pulses: Production, Processing, and Nutrition; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2022; pp. 1–28. [Google Scholar]
  17. Smýkal, P.; Coyne, C.J.; Ambrose, M.J.; Maxted, N.; Schaefer, H.; Blair, M.W.; Berger, J.; Greene, S.L.; Nelson, M.N.; Besharat, N. Legume crops phylogeny and genetic diversity for science and breeding. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 2015, 34, 43–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Sahasakul, Y.; Aursalung, A.; Thangsiri, S.; Wongchang, P.; Sangkasa-ad, P.; Wongpia, A.; Polpanit, A.; Inthachat, W.; Temviriyanukul, P.; Suttisansanee, U. Nutritional Compositions, Phenolic Contents, and Antioxidant Potentials of Ten Original Lineage Beans in Thailand. Foods 2022, 11, 2062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Mullins, A.P.; Arjmandi, B.H. Health Benefits of Plant-Based Nutrition: Focus on Beans in Cardiometabolic Diseases. Nutrients 2021, 13, 519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kambabazi, M.-R.; Okoth, M.; Ngala, S.; Njue, L.; Vasanthakaalam, H. Evaluation of nutrient content in red kidney beans, amaranth leaves, sweet potato roots and carrots cultivated in Rwanda. Afr. J. Food Agric. Nutr. Dev. 2021, 21, 17801–17814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Margier, M.; Georgé, S.; Hafnaoui, N.; Remond, D.; Nowicki, M.; Du Chaffaut, L.; Amiot, M.-J.; Reboul, E. Nutritional composition and bioactive content of legumes: Characterization of pulses frequently consumed in France and effect of the cooking method. Nutrients 2018, 10, 1668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Rebello, C.J.; Greenway, F.L.; Finley, J.W. A review of the nutritional value of legumes and their effects on obesity and its related co-morbidities. Obes. Rev. 2014, 15, 392–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Semba, R.D.; Rahman, N.; Du, S.; Ramsing, R.; Sullivan, V.; Nussbaumer, E.; Love, D.; Bloem, M.W. Patterns of Legume Purchases and Consumption in the United States. Front. Nutr. 2021, 8, 732237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Bosmali, I.; Giannenas, I.; Christophoridou, S.; Ganos, C.G.; Papadopoulos, A.; Papathanasiou, F.; Kolonas, A.; Gortzi, O. Microclimate and Genotype Impact on Nutritional and Antinutritional Quality of Locally Adapted Landraces of Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Foods 2023, 12, 1119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Singh, N.; Jain, P.; Ujinwal, M.; Langyan, S. Escalate protein plates from legumes for sustainable human nutrition. Front. Nutr. 2022, 9, 977986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Carbas, B.F.C. Potential of Phaseolus vulgaris L.: Nutritional Value, Functional Properties and Development of Innovative Tools for Their Assessment. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  27. Bai, Q.; Li, M.; Zhou, J.; Imran, A.; de Souza, T.S.P.; Barrow, C.; Dunshea, F.; Suleria, H.A.R. Influence of Processing Methods on Phytochemical Composition of Different Varieties of Beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Food Rev. Int. 2023, 40, 1941–1979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Fabbri, A.D.T.; Crosby, G.A. A review of the impact of preparation and cooking on the nutritional quality of vegetables and legumes. Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci. 2016, 3, 2–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Green, K. Plant-Based Bean Cookbook: 70 Vegan Recipes for Bean Lovers; Sourcebooks, Inc.: Naperville, IL, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  30. Hall, C.; Hillen, C.; Garden Robinson, J. Composition, Nutritional Value, and Health Benefits of Pulses. Cereal Chem. 2017, 94, 11–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Messou, T.; Adrien, K.M.; Cyrile, G.K.; Kablan, T. Effect of cooking time on the nutritional and anti-nutritional properties of red and black beans of Phaseolus lunatus (L.) consumed in south and east of Côte d’Ivoire. GSC Biol. Pharm. Sci. 2023, 22, 269–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Rebello, C.J.; Greenway, F.L.; Finley, J.W. Whole grains and pulses: A comparison of the nutritional and health benefits. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 7029–7049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Farinde, E.O.; Olanipekun, O.T.; Olasupo, R.B. Nutritional composition and antinutrients content of raw and processed lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus). Ann. Food Sci. Technol 2018, 19, 250–264. [Google Scholar]
  34. Adamu, G.; Ezeokoli, O.; Dawodu, A.; Adebayo-Oyetoro, A.; Ofodile, L. Macronutrients and micronutrients profile of some underutilized beans in south western Nigeria. Int. J. Biochem. Res. Rev. 2015, 7, 80–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Kim, I.-S.; Kim, C.-H.; Yang, W.-S. Physiologically Active Molecules and Functional Properties of Soybeans in Human Health—A Current Perspective. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 4054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Thakur, P.; Kumar, K.; Ahmed, N.; Yadav, A.N.; Kumar, S.; Rizvi, Q.U.E.H.; Chauhan, D.; Jan, S. Impact of diverse processing treatments on nutritional and anti-nutritional characteristics of soybean (Glycine max L.). J. Appl. Biol. Biotechnol. 2022, 10, 97–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Cai, J.-S.; Feng, J.-Y.; Ni, Z.-J.; Ma, R.-H.; Thakur, K.; Wang, S.; Hu, F.; Zhang, J.-G.; Wei, Z.-J. An update on the nutritional, functional, sensory characteristics of soy products, and applications of new processing strategies. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 112, 676–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Wallace, T.C.; Murray, R.; Zelman, K.M. The Nutritional Value and Health Benefits of Chickpeas and Hummus. Nutrients 2016, 8, 766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Labba, I.-C.M.; Frøkiær, H.; Sandberg, A.-S. Nutritional and antinutritional composition of fava bean (Vicia faba L., var. minor) cultivars. Food Res. Int. 2021, 140, 110038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Chaudhary, V.; Kajla, P.; Shobhit, A. Chemistry, Nutrient Composition and Quality of Faba Beans. In Faba Bean: Chemistry, Properties and Functionality; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022; pp. 75–96. [Google Scholar]
  41. Dhull, S.B.; Kidwai, M.K.; Noor, R.; Chawla, P.; Rose, P.K. A review of nutritional profile and processing of faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Legume Sci. 2022, 4, e129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Dahiya, P.K.; Linnemann, A.R.; Van Boekel, M.A.J.S.; Khetarpaul, N.; Grewal, R.B.; Nout, M.J.R. Mung Bean: Technological and Nutritional Potential. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2015, 55, 670–688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Chandrasiri, S.D.; Liyanage, R.; Vidanarachchi, J.K.; Weththasinghe, P.; Jayawardana, B.C. Does Processing have a Considerable Effect on the Nutritional and Functional Properties of Mung Bean (Vigna radiata)? Procedia Food Sci. 2016, 6, 352–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Shah, H.; Khan, U.; Alam, S.; Shad, A.; Iqbal, Z.; Parveen, S. Effect of home cooking on the retention of various nutrients in commonly consumed pulses in Pakistan. Sarhad J. Agric 2011, 27, 279. [Google Scholar]
  45. Li, H.; Zou, L.; Li, X.-Y.; Wu, D.-T.; Liu, H.-Y.; Li, H.-B.; Gan, R.-Y. Adzuki bean (Vigna angularis): Chemical compositions, physicochemical properties, health benefits, and food applications. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2022, 21, 2335–2362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Moreno-Jiménez, M.R.; Cervantes-Cardoza, V.; Gallegos-Infante, J.A.; González-Laredo, R.F.; Estrella, I.; García-Gasca, T.d.J.; Herrera-Carrera, E.; Díaz-Rivas, J.O.; Rocha-Guzmán, N.E. Phenolic composition changes of processed common beans: Their antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects in intestinal cancer cells. Food Res. Int. 2015, 76, 79–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Mutari, B.; Sibiya, J.; Matova, P.M.; Gasura, E.; Simango, K. Drought stress impact on agronomic, shoot, physiological, canning and nutritional quality traits of navy beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) under field conditions in Zimbabwe. Field Crops Res. 2023, 292, 108826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Maitresya, L.B.; Surya, R. Development of tempeh made from soybeans, black-eyed beans, and winged beans. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2023, 1200, 012008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Messina, V. Nutritional and health benefits of dried beans. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2014, 100, 437S–442S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Sánchez-Velázquez, O.A.; Luna-Vital, D.A.; Morales-Hernandez, N.; Contreras, J.; Villaseñor-Tapia, E.C.; Fragoso-Medina, J.A.; Mojica, L. Nutritional, bioactive components and health properties of the milpa triad system seeds (corn, common bean and pumpkin). Front. Nutr. 2023, 10, 1169675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Abioye, V.; Olanipekun, B.; Omotosho, O. Effect of varieties on the proximate, nutritional and anti-nutritional composition of nine variants of African yam bean seeds (Sphenostylis stenocarpa). Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 1, 17–21. [Google Scholar]
  52. Mofunanya, A. Changes in germination and biochemical composition of Phaseolus lunatus (lima bean) as affected by Acanthoscelides obtectus SAY infestation. J. Appl. Life Sci. Int. 2017, 11, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ogechukwu, O.C.; Okoye, J.I. Effect of heat processing treatments on the nutrient and anti-nutrient contents of lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus) flour. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 2017, 2, 13–17. [Google Scholar]
  54. Soomro, H.; Soomro, A.H.; Haider, M.S.; Tara, O.M. Evaluation of nutritional profile of pulses consumed in Pakistan. J. Pure Appl. Agric. 2020, 5, 27–33. [Google Scholar]
  55. Kamboj, R.; Nanda, V. Proximate composition, nutritional profile and health benefits of legumes—A review. Legume Res. Int. J. 2018, 41, 325–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Abebe, B.K.; Alemayehu, M.T. A review of the nutritional use of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp) for human and animal diets. J. Agric. Food Res. 2022, 10, 100383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Nasir, M.; Sidhu, J.S.; Sogi, D.S. Processing and Nutritional Profile of Mung Bean, Black Gram, Pigeon Pea, Lupin, Moth Bean, and Indian Vetch. In Dry Beans and Pulses; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2022; pp. 431–452. [Google Scholar]
  58. Sangsukiam, T.; Duangmal, K. Changes in bioactive compounds and health-promoting activities in adzuki bean: Effect of cooking conditions and in vitro simulated gastrointestinal digestion. Food Res. Int. 2022, 157, 111371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Blair, M.; Li, H.; Nekkalapudi, L.; Becerra, V.; Paredes, M. Nutritional Traits of Beans (Phaseolus vulgaris): Nutraceutical Characterization and Genomics. In Compendium of Crop Genome Designing for Nutraceuticals; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2023; pp. 611–638. [Google Scholar]
  60. Seidu, K.; Osundahunsi, O.; Osamudiamen, P. Nutrients assessment of some lima bean varieties grown in southwest Nigeria. Int. Food Res. J. 2018, 25, 848–853. [Google Scholar]
  61. Agarwal, S.; Chauhan, E.S. Adzuki beans-physical and nutritional characteristics of beans and its health benefits. Int. J. Health Sci. Res 2019, 9, 304–310. [Google Scholar]
  62. Lo Turco, V.; Potortì, A.G.; Rando, R.; Ravenda, P.; Dugo, G.; Di Bella, G. Functional properties and fatty acids profile of different beans varieties. Nat. Prod. Res. 2016, 30, 2243–2248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Bessada, S.M.; Barreira, J.C.; Oliveira, M.B.P. Pulses and food security: Dietary protein, digestibility, bioactive and functional properties. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 93, 53–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Chaurasia, S. Green beans. In Nutritional Composition and Antioxidant Properties of Fruits and Vegetables; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 289–300. [Google Scholar]
  65. Kilua, A.; Chihiro, H.; Han, K.H.; Homma, K. Whole kidney bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) and bean hull reduce the total serum cholesterol, modulate the gut microbiota and affect the caecal fermentation in rats. Bioact. Carbohydr. Diet. Fibre 2020, 24, 100232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Nguyen, A.T.; Althwab, S.; Qiu, H.; Zbasnik, R.; Urrea, C.; Carr, T.P.; Schlegel, V. Pinto beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) lower non-HDL cholesterol in hamsters fed a diet rich in saturated fat and act on genes involved in cholesterol homeostasis. J. Nutr. 2019, 149, 996–1003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Kan, L.; Nie, S.; Hu, J.; Wang, S.; Cui, S.W.; Li, Y.; Xu, S.; Wu, Y.; Wang, J.; Bai, Z. Nutrients, phytochemicals and antioxidant activities of 26 kidney bean cultivars. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2017, 108, 467–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Tor-Roca, A.; Garcia-Aloy, M.; Mattivi, F.; Llorach, R.; Andres-Lacueva, C.; Urpi-Sarda, M. Phytochemicals in legumes: A qualitative reviewed analysis. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2020, 68, 13486–13496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Marventano, S.; Izquierdo Pulido, M.; Sánchez-González, C.; Godos, J.; Speciani, A.; Galvano, F.; Grosso, G. Legume consumption and CVD risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Public Health Nutr 2017, 20, 245–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Kirkpatrick, C.F.; Sikand, G.; Petersen, K.S.; Anderson, C.A.M.; Aspry, K.E.; Bolick, J.P.; Kris-Etherton, P.M.; Maki, K.C. Nutrition interventions for adults with dyslipidemia: A Clinical Perspective from the National Lipid Association. J. Clin. Lipidol. 2023, 17, 428–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Doma, K.; Folinar, K.; Ramdath, D.D.; Wolever, T.M.S.; Duncan, A.M. Canned Beans Decrease Serum Total and LDL Cholesterol in Adults with Elevated LDL Cholesterol in a 4-wk Multicenter, Randomized, Crossover Study. J. Nutr. 2021, 151, 3701–3709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Shea, M.K.; Barger, K.; Rogers, G.T.; Talegawkar, S.A.; Eicher-Miller, H.A.; Booth, S.L. Dietary Intakes of Community-Dwelling Adults in the United States across Older Adulthood: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2015–March 2020. J. Nutr. 2024, 154, 691–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Dai, Z.; Su, D.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, Y.; Hu, B.; Ye, H.; Jabbar, S.; Zeng, X. Immunomodulatory Activity in Vitro and in Vivo of Verbascose from Mung Beans (Phaseolus aureus). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 10727–10735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Sangaramoorthy, M.; Koo, J.; John, E.M. Intake of bean fiber, beans, and grains and reduced risk of hormone receptor-negative breast cancer: The San Francisco Bay Area Breast Cancer Study. Cancer Med. 2018, 7, 2131–2144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Dan, X.; Ng, T.B.; Wong, J.H.; Chan, Y.S.; Cheung, R.C.F.; Chan, W.Y. A hemagglutinin isolated from Northeast China black beans induced mitochondrial dysfunction and apoptosis in colorectal cancer cells. Biochim. Biophys. Acta (BBA) Mol. Cell Res. 2016, 1863, 2201–2211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Phaniendra, A.; Jestadi, D.B.; Periyasamy, L. Free radicals: Properties, sources, targets, and their implication in various diseases. Indian J. Clin. Biochem. 2015, 30, 11–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Baxter, B.A.; Oppel, R.C.; Ryan, E.P. Navy Beans Impact the Stool Metabolome and Metabolic Pathways for Colon Health in Cancer Survivors. Nutrients 2019, 11, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Borresen, E.C.; Brown, D.G.; Harbison, G.; Taylor, L.; Fairbanks, A.; O’Malia, J.; Bazan, M.; Rao, S.; Bailey, S.M.; Wdowik, M.; et al. A Randomized Controlled Trial to Increase Navy Bean or Rice Bran Consumption in Colorectal Cancer Survivors. Nutr. Cancer 2016, 68, 1269–1280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Peddio, S.; Padiglia, A.; Cannea, F.B.; Crnjar, R.; Zam, W.; Sharifi-Rad, J.; Rescigno, A.; Zucca, P. Common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) α-amylase inhibitors as safe nutraceutical strategy against diabetes and obesity: An update review. Phytother. Res. 2022, 36, 2803–2823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Bazzano, L.A.; Thompson, A.M.; Tees, M.T.; Nguyen, C.H.; Winham, D.M. Non-soy legume consumption lowers cholesterol levels: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Nutr. Metab. Cardiovasc. Dis. 2011, 21, 94–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. McRae, M.P. Dietary Fiber Intake and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: An Umbrella Review of Meta-analyses. J. Chiropr. Med. 2018, 17, 44–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Delcour, J.A.; Aman, P.; Courtin, C.M.; Hamaker, B.R.; Verbeke, K. Prebiotics, Fermentable Dietary Fiber, and Health Claims. Adv. Nutr. 2016, 7, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Agostoni, C.V. Scientific opinion on dietary reference values for carbohydrates and dietary fibre. EFSA J. 2010, 8, 1462. [Google Scholar]
  84. Reverri, E.J.; Randolph, J.M.; Steinberg, F.M.; Kappagoda, C.T.; Edirisinghe, I.; Burton-Freeman, B.M. Black Beans, Fiber, and Antioxidant Capacity Pilot Study: Examination of Whole Foods vs. Functional Components on Postprandial Metabolic, Oxidative Stress, and Inflammation in Adults with Metabolic Syndrome. Nutrients 2015, 7, 6139–6154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Becerra-Tomás, N.; Díaz-López, A.; Rosique-Esteban, N.; Ros, E.; Buil-Cosiales, P.; Corella, D.; Estruch, R.; Fitó, M.; Serra-Majem, L.; Arós, F. Legume consumption is inversely associated with type 2 diabetes incidence in adults: A prospective assessment from the PREDIMED study. Clin. Nutr. 2018, 37, 906–913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Mirmiran, P.; Hosseini, S.; Hosseinpour-Niazi, S.; Azizi, F. Legume consumption increase adiponectin concentrations among type 2 diabetic patients: A randomized crossover clinical trial. Endocrinología Diabetes y Nutrición 2019, 66, 49–55. (In English) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Bakaloudi, D.R.; Halloran, A.; Rippin, H.L.; Oikonomidou, A.C.; Dardavesis, T.I.; Williams, J.; Wickramasinghe, K.; Breda, J.; Chourdakis, M. Intake and adequacy of the vegan diet. A systematic review of the evidence. Clin. Nutr. 2021, 40, 3503–3521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Zafar, M.I.; Mills, K.E.; Zheng, J.; Regmi, A.; Hu, S.Q.; Gou, L.; Chen, L.-L. Low-glycemic index diets as an intervention for diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2019, 110, 891–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Atkinson, F.S.; Foster-Powell, K.; Brand-Miller, J.C. International tables of glycemic index and glycemic load values: 2008. Diabetes Care 2008, 31, 2281–2283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Kazemi, M.; McBreairty, L.E.; Chizen, D.R.; Pierson, R.A.; Chilibeck, P.D.; Zello, G.A. A Comparison of a Pulse-Based Diet and the Therapeutic Lifestyle Changes Diet in Combination with Exercise and Health Counselling on the Cardio-Metabolic Risk Profile in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Nutrients 2018, 10, 1387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Gortzi, O.; Dimopoulou, M.; Androutsos, O.; Vraka, A.; Gousia, H.; Bargiota, A. Effectiveness of a Nutrition Education Program for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 2114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Gupta, R.K.; Gupta, K.; Sharma, A.; Das, M.; Ansari, I.A.; Dwivedi, P.D. Health Risks and Benefits of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum) Consumption. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2017, 65, 6–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Liu, Y.; Wang, Q.; Li, S.; Yue, Y.; Ma, Y.; Ren, G. Convenient food made of extruded adzuki bean attenuates inflammation and improves glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomized controlled trial. Ther. Clin. Risk Manag. 2018, 14, 871–884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Powell, E.E.; Wong, V.W.-S.; Rinella, M. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Lancet 2021, 397, 2212–2224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Saeed, N.; Nadeau, B.; Shannon, C.; Tincopa, M. Evaluation of Dietary Approaches for the Treatment of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: A Systematic Review. Nutrients 2019, 11, 3064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Mirizzi, A.; Franco, I.; Leone, C.M.; Bonfiglio, C.; Cozzolongo, R.; Notarnicola, M.; Giannuzzi, V.; Tutino, V.; De Nunzio, V.; Bruno, I.; et al. Effects of Some Food Components on Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Severity: Results from a Cross-Sectional Study. Nutrients 2019, 11, 2744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Bischoff, S.C.; Bernal, W.; Dasarathy, S.; Merli, M.; Plank, L.D.; Schütz, T.; Plauth, M. ESPEN practical guideline: Clinical nutrition in liver disease. Clin. Nutr. 2020, 39, 3533–3562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Do, D.T.; Singh, J.; Johnson, S.; Singh, H. Probing the Double-Layered Cotyledon Cell Structure of Navy Beans: Barrier Effect of the Protein Matrix on In Vitro Starch Digestion. Nutrients 2023, 15, 105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Papanikolaou, Y. Dietary Patterns with Increased Bean Consumption are Associated with Greater Overall and Shortfall Nutrient Intakes, Lower Added Sugar, and Improved Diet Quality in Adults. 2023; preprint. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Pasiakos, S.M.; Lieberman, H.R.; Fulgoni, V.L., III. Higher-protein diets are associated with higher HDL cholesterol and lower BMI and waist circumference in US adults. J. Nutr. 2015, 145, 605–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Tucker, L.A. Bean Consumption Accounts for Differences in Body Fat and Waist Circumference: A Cross-Sectional Study of 246 Women. J. Nutr. Metab. 2020, 47, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Dodevska, M.S.; Sobajic, S.S.; Djordjevic, P.B.; Dimitrijevic-Sreckovic, V.S.; Spasojevic-Kalimanovska, V.V.; Djordjevic, B.Ι. Effects of total fibre or resistant starch-rich diets within lifestyle intervention in obese prediabetic adults. Eur. J. Nutr. 2016, 55, 127–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Tucker, L.A. Legume Intake, Body Weight, and Abdominal Adiposity: 10-Year Weight Change and Cross-Sectional Results in 15,185 US Adults. Nutrients 2023, 15, 460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Wang, S.S.; Chen, L.; Yang, H.; Gu, J.; Wang, J.; Ren, F. Regular intake of white kidney beans extract (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) induces weight loss compared to placebo in obese human subjects. Food Sci. Nutr. 2020, 8, 1315–1324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Grube, B.; Chong, W.-F.; Chong, P.-W.; Riede, L. Weight reduction and maintenance with IQP-PV-101: A 12-week randomized controlled study with a 24-week open label period. Obesity 2014, 22, 645–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Monk, J.M.; Lepp, D.; Wu, W.; Graf, D.; Hutchinson, A.L.; Robinson, L.E.; Power, K. Navy and black bean supplementation primes the colonic mucosal microenvironment to improve gut health. J. Nutr. Biochem. 2017, 49, 89–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Kadyan, S.; Sharma, A.; Arjmandi, B.H.; Singh, P.; Nagpal, R. Prebiotic potential of dietary beans and pulses and their resistant starch for aging-associated gut and metabolic health. Nutrients 2022, 14, 1726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Monk, J.M.; Lepp, D.; Wu, W.; Graf, D.; Hutchinson, A.L.; Robinson, L.E.; Power, K. Navy bean supplementation in obesity increases Akkermansia muciniphila abundance and attenuates obesity related impairments in gut barrier function. FASEB J. 2016, 30, 421.2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Choi, O.; Lee, Y.; Kang, B.; Cho, S.K.; Kang, Y.; Kang, D.-W.; Lee, S.-B.; Bae, S.-M.; Kim, J. Identification and characterization of gut-associated lactic acid bacteria isolated from the bean bug, Riptortus pedestris (Hemiptera: Alydidae). PLoS ONE 2023, 18, e0281121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Hou, D.; Zhao, Q.; Yousaf, L.; Khan, J.; Xue, Y.; Shen, Q. Consumption of mung bean (Vigna radiata L.) attenuates obesity, ameliorates lipid metabolic disorders and modifies the gut microbiota composition in mice fed a high-fat diet. J. Funct. Foods 2020, 64, 103687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Garcia-Mantrana, I.; Selma-Royo, M.; Collado, M.C. Shifts on gut microbiota associated to mediterranean diet adherence and specific dietary intakes on general adult population. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 319919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Nicolás-García, M.; Jimenez Martinez, C.; Perucini-Avendaño, M.; Camacho-Díaz, B.; Jiménez-Aparicio, A.; Dávila Ortiz, G. Phenolic Compounds in Legumes: Composition, Processing and Gut Health. In Legumes Research; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2021; Volume 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Cao, S.-Y.; Zhao, C.-N.; Xu, X.-Y.; Tang, G.-Y.; Corke, H.; Gan, R.-Y.; Li, H.-B. Dietary plants, gut microbiota, and obesity: Effects and mechanisms. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 92, 194–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Beane, K.E.; Redding, M.C.; Wang, X.; Pan, J.H.; Le, B.; Cicalo, C.; Shin, E.-C. Effects of dietary fibers, micronutrients, and phytonutrients on gut microbiome: A review. Appl. Biol. Chem. 2021, 64, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Shi, L.; Mu, K.; Arntfield, S.D.; Nickerson, M.T. Changes in levels of enzyme inhibitors during soaking and cooking for pulses available in Canada. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 54, 1014–1022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Cabanillas, B.; Jappe, U.; Novak, N. Allergy to peanut, soybean, and other legumes: Recent advances in allergen characterization, stability to processing and IgE cross-reactivity. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2018, 62, 1700446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. EFSA Panel on Food Additives Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS); Mortensen, A.; Aguilar, F.; Crebelli, R.; Di Domenico, A.; Frutos, M.J.; Galtier, P.; Gott, D.; Gundert-Remy, U.; Lambré, C.; et al. Re-evaluation of locust bean gum (E 410) as a food additive. EFSA J. 2017, 15, e04646. [Google Scholar]
  118. Ketnawa, S.; Ogawa, Y. In vitro protein digestibility and biochemical characteristics of soaked, boiled and fermented soybeans. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 14257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Cirkovic Velickovic, T.D.; Stanic-Vucinic, D.J. The role of dietary phenolic compounds in protein digestion and processing technologies to improve their antinutritive properties. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2018, 17, 82–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Power, K.A.; Monk, J.M.; Lepp, D.; Robinson, L.E.; Wu, W.; Carey, C.; Graf, D.; Hussain, A.; McGillis, L. Common Bean and Chickpea Supplemented Diets Beneficially Enhance the Colonic Microenvironment and Reduce Colitis-Associated Inflammation. FASEB J. 2016, 30, 893.6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Monk, J.M.; Wu, W.; Hutchinson, A.L.; Pauls, P.; Robinson, L.E.; Power, K.A. Navy and black bean supplementation attenuates colitis-associated inflammation and colonic epithelial damage. J. Nutr. Biochem. 2018, 56, 215–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Gibson, P.R.; Halmos, E.P.; So, D.; Yao, C.K.; Varney, J.E.; Muir, J.G. Diet as a therapeutic tool in chronic gastrointestinal disorders: Lessons from the FODMAP journey. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2022, 37, 644–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Tuck, C.; Ly, E.; Bogatyrev, A.; Costetsou, I.; Gibson, P.; Barrett, J.; Muir, J. Fermentable short chain carbohydrate (FODMAP) content of common plant-based foods and processed foods suitable for vegetarian-and vegan-based eating patterns. J. Hum. Nutr. Diet. 2018, 31, 422–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Traylor, D.A.; Gorissen, S.H.M.; Phillips, S.M. Perspective: Protein Requirements and Optimal Intakes in Aging: Are We Ready to Recommend More Than the Recommended Daily Allowance? Adv. Nutr. 2018, 9, 171–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Williams, C.; Ronco, C.; Kotanko, P. Whole grains in the renal diet-is it time to reevaluate their role? Blood Purif. 2014, 36, 210–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Howard, L.R.; White, B.L.; Uebersax, M.A.; Siddiq, M. Dry beans processing, quality evaluation, and nutrition. In Handbook of Vegetables and Vegetable Processing; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018; pp. 559–587. [Google Scholar]
  127. Kumar Dahiya, P.; Nout, M.J.R.; van Boekel, M.A.; Khetarpaul, N.; Bala Grewal, R.; Linnemann, A. Nutritional characteristics of mung bean foods. Br. Food J. 2014, 116, 1031–1046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Tan, C.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, S. Is a vegetarian diet safe to follow during pregnancy? A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2019, 59, 2586–2596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Davies, R.W.; Kozior, M.; Lynch, A.E.; Bass, J.J.; Atherton, P.J.; Smith, K.; Jakeman, P.M. The Effect of Fava Bean (Vicia faba L.) Protein Ingestion on Myofibrillar Protein Synthesis at Rest and after Resistance Exercise in Healthy, Young Men and Women: A Randomised Control Trial. Nutrients 2022, 14, 3688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Herrera-Hernández, I.M.; Sánchez, E.; Ramírez-Estrada, C.A.; Anchondo-Páez, J.C.; Pérez-Álvarez, S. Supply of essential and nonessential amino acids, proteins, antioxidants, iron and zinc from the main varieties of beans consumed in Mexico and their potential for biofortification. Not. Sci. Biol. 2023, 15, 11733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Gulukun, E.; Ari, M.; Alu, S. Proximate composition and antinutritional factors of differently processed kidney bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) seeds. Niger. J. Anim. Prod. 2020, 47, 169–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Ganesan, K.; Xu, B. A critical review on phytochemical profile and health promoting effects of mung bean (Vigna radiata). Food Sci. Hum. Wellness 2018, 7, 11–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Leonberg-Yoo, A.K.; Tighiouart, H.; Levey, A.S.; Beck, G.J.; Sarnak, M.J. Urine potassium excretion, kidney failure, and mortality in CKD. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 2017, 69, 341–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Beto, J.A. The role of calcium in human aging. Clin. Nutr. Res. 2015, 4, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Habibi, N.; Livingstone, K.M.; Edwards, S.; Grieger, J.A. Do older women of reproductive age have better diet quality than younger women of reproductive age? Nutrients 2021, 13, 3830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Caut, C.; Leach, M.; Steel, A. Dietary guideline adherence during preconception and pregnancy: A systematic review. Matern. Child Nutr. 2020, 16, e12916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Phillips, J.A. Dietary guidelines for Americans, 2020–2025. Workplace Health Saf. 2021, 69, 395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  138. Martimianaki, G.; Peppa, E.; Valanou, E.; Papatesta, E.M.; Klinaki, E.; Trichopoulou, A. Today’s Mediterranean Diet in Greece: Findings from the National Health and Nutrition Survey—HYDRIA (2013–2014). Nutrients 2022, 14, 1193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Libera, J.; Iłowiecka, K.; Stasiak, D. Consumption of processed red meat and its impact on human health: A review. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 56, 6115–6123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Miller, V.; Mente, A.; Dehghan, M.; Rangarajan, S.; Zhang, X.; Swaminathan, S.; Dagenais, G.; Gupta, R.; Mohan, V.; Lear, S. Fruit, vegetable, and legume intake, and cardiovascular disease and deaths in 18 countries (PURE): A prospective cohort study. Lancet 2017, 390, 2037–2049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Ahnen, R.T.; Jonnalagadda, S.S.; Slavin, J.L. Role of plant protein in nutrition, wellness, and health. Nutr. Rev. 2019, 77, 735–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Sirtori, C.R. Risks and benefits of soy phytoestrogens in cardiovascular diseases, cancer, climacteric symptoms and osteoporosis. Drug Saf. 2001, 24, 665–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Ramdath, D.D.; Padhi, E.M.; Sarfaraz, S.; Renwick, S.; Duncan, A.M. Beyond the cholesterol-lowering effect of soy protein: A review of the effects of dietary soy and its constituents on risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Nutrients 2017, 9, 324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Bielefeld, D.; Grafenauer, S.; Rangan, A. The effects of legume consumption on markers of glycaemic control in individuals with and without diabetes mellitus: A systematic literature review of randomised controlled trials. Nutrients 2020, 12, 2123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Neshatbini Tehrani, A.; Hatami, B.; Helli, B.; Yari, Z.; Daftari, G.; Salehpour, A.; Hedayati, M.; Khalili, E.; Hosseini, S.A.; Hekmatdoost, A. The effect of soy isoflavones on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and the level of fibroblast growth factor-21 and fetuin A. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 5134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  146. Galchenko, A.; Gapparova, K.; Sidorova, E. The influence of vegetarian and vegan diets on the state of bone mineral density in humans. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2023, 63, 845–861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  147. Luhovyy, B.L.; Mollard, R.C.; Panahi, S.; Nunez, M.F.; Cho, F.; Anderson, G.H. Canned navy bean consumption reduces metabolic risk factors associated with obesity. Can. J. Diet. Pract. Res. 2015, 76, 33–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  148. Kohno, M.; Sugano, H.; Shigihara, Y.; Shiraishi, Y.; Motoyama, T. Improvement of glucose and lipid metabolism via mung bean protein consumption: Clinical trials of GLUCODIA™ isolated mung bean protein in the USA and Canada. J. Nutr. Sci. 2018, 7, e2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Huwiler, V.V.; Schönenberger, K.A.; Segesser von Brunegg, A.; Reber, E.; Mühlebach, S.; Stanga, Z.; Balmer, M.L. Prolonged isolated soluble dietary fibre supplementation in overweight and obese patients: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Nutrients 2022, 14, 2627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Rondanelli, M.; Barrile, G.C.; Cavioni, A.; Donati, P.; Genovese, E.; Mansueto, F.; Mazzola, G.; Patelli, Z.; Pirola, M.; Razza, C.; et al. A Narrative Review on Strategies for the Reversion of Prediabetes to Normoglycemia: Food Pyramid, Physical Activity, and Self-Monitoring Innovative Glucose Devices. Nutrients 2023, 15, 4943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Nosratabadi, S.; Ashtary-Larky, D.; Hosseini, F.; Namkhah, Z.; Mohammadi, S.; Salamat, S.; Nadery, M.; Yarmand, S.; Zamani, M.; Wong, A. The effects of vitamin C supplementation on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Metab. Syndr. Clin. Res. Rev. 2023, 17, 102824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Bryant, K.L.; Hansen, C.; Hecht, E.E. Fermentation technology as a driver of human brain expansion. Commun. Biol. 2023, 6, 1190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Sharan, S.; Zanghelini, G.; Zotzel, J.; Bonerz, D.; Aschoff, J.; Saint-Eve, A.; Maillard, M.N. Fava bean (Vicia faba L.) for food applications: From seed to ingredient processing and its effect on functional properties, antinutritional factors, flavor, and color. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2021, 20, 401–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Kiani, A.K.; Donato, K.; Aquilanti, B.; Velluti, V.; Matera, G. Main nutritional deficiencies. J. Prev. Med. Hyg. 2022, 63 (Suppl. 3.), e93–e101. [Google Scholar]
  155. Sparvoli, F.; Giofré, S.; Cominelli, E.; Avite, E.; Giuberti, G.; Luongo, D.; Rossi, M. Sensory characteristics and nutritional quality of food products made with a biofortified and lectin free common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) flour. Nutrients 2021, 13, 4517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Benites-Mena, J.; Vargas-De-La-Cruz, C.; Vergara-Valdés, C.; Jave-Nakayo, J.; Ortiz-Viedma, J.; Char, C.; Cepeda, A. Obtaining an Oily Ingredient Rich in PUFAS and Tocopherols and a High-Nutritional-Value Flour from Beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) by Supercritical CO2 Extraction. Foods 2023, 13, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Bosmali, I.; Kotsiou, K.; Matsakidou, A.; Irakli, M.; Madesis, P.; Biliaderis, C.G. Fortification of wheat bread with an alternative source of bean proteins using raw and roasted Phaseolus coccineus flours: Impact on physicochemical, nutritional and quality attributes. Food Hydrocoll. 2025, 158, 110527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Wang, Y.; Jian, C. Sustainable plant-based ingredients as wheat flour substitutes in bread making. npj Sci. Food 2022, 6, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Anosike, F.C.; Chinwendu, O.R.; Nnaemeka, N.A.; Nneka, M.G.; Inyang, P.; Ikechukwu, C.; Prince-Osuji, E.C. Evaluation of baking qualities, functional and physicochemical properties of wheat supplemented with cassava and mung bean flour blends for bread making. Food Bioeng. 2023, 2, 264–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Olakanmi, S.J.; Jayas, D.S.; Paliwal, J.; Chaudhry, M.M.A.; Findlay, C.R.J. Quality Characterization of Fava Bean-Fortified Bread Using Hyperspectral Imaging. Foods 2024, 13, 231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Chockchaisawasdee, S.; Mendoza, M.C.; Beecroft, C.A.; Kerr, A.C.; Stathopoulos, C.E.; Fiore, A. Development of a gluten free bread enriched with faba bean husk as a fibre supplement. LWT 2023, 173, 114362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Alfaro-Diaz, A.; Escobedo, A.; Luna-Vital, D.A.; Castillo-Herrera, G.; Mojica, C. Common beans as a source of food ingredients: Techno-functional and biological potential. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2023, 22, 2910–2944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Nartea, A.; Kuhalskaya, A.; Fanesi, B.; Orhotohwo, O.L.; Susek, K.; Rocchetti, L.; Papa, R. Legume byproducts as ingredients for food applications: Preparation, nutrition, bioactivity, and techno-functional properties. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2023, 22, 1953–1985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Serrem, C.A.; de Kock, H.L.; Taylor, J.R.N. Nutritional quality, sensory quality and consumer acceptability of sorghum and bread wheat biscuits fortified with defatted soy flour. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2011, 46, 74–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Nurdin, N.M.; Navratilova, H.F.; Ekawidyani, K.R.; Pratiwi, D.; Kurniawan, M.Y. Soy Flour-Based Snack Bar as Potential Snack Alternative for Diabetes Mellitus. J. Gizi Dan Pangan 2020, 15, 125–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Nurdin, N.M.; Navratilova, H.F.; Ekawidyani, K.R.; Kurniawan, M.Y. Soy flour snack bars lower glycaemic response in type 2 diabetes mellitus subjects: A randomised cross-over design. Malays. J. Nutr. 2022, 28, 163–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Siddiqui, S.A.; Mahmud, M.C.; Abdi, G.; Wanich, U.; Farooqi, M.Q.U.; Settapramote, N.; Wani, S.A. New alternatives from sustainable sources to wheat in bakery foods: Science, technology, and challenges. J. Food Biochem. 2022, 46, e14185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Prisma flow chart of the study (version 2020). * PubMed 147, Web of Science 180, Scopus 2, Cochrane Library 7. ** Excluded by the researchers due to sample parameters (small sample) or examined/analyzed varieties that were not included in this review (http://www.prisma-statement.org/).
Figure 1. Prisma flow chart of the study (version 2020). * PubMed 147, Web of Science 180, Scopus 2, Cochrane Library 7. ** Excluded by the researchers due to sample parameters (small sample) or examined/analyzed varieties that were not included in this review (http://www.prisma-statement.org/).
Applsci 14 10215 g001
Figure 2. Types of Beans (https://www.onlyfoods.net/different-types-of-beans.html, accessed on 31 July 2020).
Figure 2. Types of Beans (https://www.onlyfoods.net/different-types-of-beans.html, accessed on 31 July 2020).
Applsci 14 10215 g002
Figure 3. The gut microbiota is modulated by dietary natural plants (Cao et al., 2019) [113].
Figure 3. The gut microbiota is modulated by dietary natural plants (Cao et al., 2019) [113].
Applsci 14 10215 g003
Table 1. Details of the search process and the unique contributions of each database to the study.
Table 1. Details of the search process and the unique contributions of each database to the study.
DatabaseKeywordsMeSH Terms (PubMed)Initial ArticlesDuplicates RemovedFinal Articles for AnalysisContribution to StudyReason for Inclusion
PubMed#Beans, #Types, #Diet, #Nutritional profile, #Nutrients, #Bioactive compounds, #Health benefits, #Cardiovascular disease, #Diabetes mellitus, #Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease #Obesity, #Nutrition, and #Diet.#Beans, #Nutrients, #Nutrition, #Interventions, #Diet, #Health1477140Provided a broad understanding of the interplay between bean consumption, interventions, and health benefits; MeSH terms ensured precision in the searchWidely recognized as a premier biomedical database, often used for systematic reviews in healthcare research
Web of Science#Beans, #Types, #Diet, #Nutritional profile, #Nutrients, #Bioactive compounds, #Health benefits, #NCDs, #Cardiovascular disease, #Diabetes mellitus, #Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease #Obesity, #Nutrition, and #Diet.N/A (Web of Science doesn’t use MeSH terms)1806174Enhanced the overall coverage of the literature related to bean nutrients, interventions, and healthProvides a multidisciplinary approach, covering a wide range of scientific disciplines
Scopus#Beans, #Nutrition, #Health, #NCDs, #Side Effects and #Evidence-Based Interventions.#Beans, #Health, #NCDs220Strengthened the evidence base by focusing on beans’ bioactive compounds related to evidence-based interventions; MeSH terms ensured specificityRenowned for systematic reviews and emphasis on evidence-based interventions in healthcare research
Cochrane Library#Beans, #Nutrition, #Health, #Side Effects and #Evidence-Based Interventions.#Beans, #Nutrition, #Health, #Side effects, #Evidence-Based Interventions734Strengthened the evidence base by focusing on beans’ bioactive compounds related to evidence-based interventions; MeSH terms ensured specificityRenowned for systematic reviews and emphasis on evidence-based interventions in healthcare research
Table 2. Proximate composition of twelve bean varieties (in g per 100 g dry weight at the first row and per 100 g cooked at the second row).
Table 2. Proximate composition of twelve bean varieties (in g per 100 g dry weight at the first row and per 100 g cooked at the second row).
Type of BeansEnergy
(kcal)
ProteinCarbohydratesSugarFibersFat
(Total)
SaturatedUnsaturatedReferences
Black beans310 21.2167.9504.932.1602.16[31,32]
37019.0371.1205.861.101.1
Kidney beans386.392370.48<0.120.931.3801.38[18,21,31,32]
1109.6720<0.111.60.2800.28
Navy beans140 24.138.5<0.14.31.5101.51[19,31,32]
127824<0.190.600.6
Pinto beans143 23.738.5<0.14.11.240.141.1[19,28,31,32]
123822<0.180.50.10.4
Great Northern beans208 23.1323<0.17.772.0902.09[24,32]
104719<0.160.400.4
Lima beans392.2822.4772.75321.341.2701.27[18,33]
11519.3561.65261.1401.14
Black-eyed beans334.6116.5962.8121.927.821.8901.89[32,34]
996.6117.7510.257.50.4500.45
Soybeans46636.4930.2 7.322.919.94 4.2815.66[35,36,37]
3273821.163.617.51.220.140.53
Garbanzo beans37820.4762.9510.712.26.040.6034.108[32,38]
1648.8627.424.87.62.590.2691.739
Fava bean301 22.730.8714.9815.891.401.4[32,39,40,41]
1168.1720.6814.985.70.3800.38
Mung beans391.37 26.3068.39 8.4727.851.40.0251.375[18,42,43,44]
37410.5854.65.8817.1510.0250.975
Adzuki beans386.07 26.9567.84<0.117.750.770.20.57[18,45]
3292063<0.1130.50.20.3
Table 3. Vitamin contents of twelve bean varieties (μg or mg per 100 g dry weight at the first row and per 100 g cooked at the second row).
Table 3. Vitamin contents of twelve bean varieties (μg or mg per 100 g dry weight at the first row and per 100 g cooked at the second row).
Type of BeansA (μg)B1 (mg)Β2 (mg)Β3 (mg)Β6 (mg)Β9 (μg)E (mg)Κ (mg)C (mg)References
Black beans172.40.42 1.921496.70.568.63[27,31]
170.90.11.90.2861280.210.561.32
Kidney beans7680.5 0.03 0.51 6.71300.900.562.67[18,19,20,21,22]
4621.170.1030.510.2121940.430.560
Navy beansn.d. *2.21.682.1884.281400.020.254.5[19,21,22,27]
n.d. *0.4310.121.1810.251222n.d. *0.250
Pinto beans-4n.d. *1.1744.741720.210.566.3[19,21,22,27]
818.90.330.1061.1740.3922103.510.560
Great Northern beansn.d.*0.880.192.10.49102500.01[19,22,30,50]
n.d. *0.280.1041.2050.207902.50.010.01
Lima beans57.20.99 0.2 1.99 0.49300 2.940.0564.37[18,51,52,53]
20.90.1420.11.330.204341.920.0560.03
Black-eyed beans12 0.510.21.30.3133--0.0026[22,53,54,55]
00.3450.0940.8460.171356-0.0070.0004
Soybeans4210.730.393.26 1000.12277 47[22,35,37,55]
00.70.252.610.573050.124100
Garbanzo beans670.4770.2121.5410.5355570.8294[22,38]
270.1160.0630.5260.2281720.3541.3
Fava beans350<1<11.5<1960.08n.d. *33[22,40,41,56]
2700.3720.111.20.094580n.d. *19.8
Mung beans10.90.5 0.3 2.2 --12.5n.d. *10[18,42,57]
130.050.1020.8170.05429022.710
Azuki beans180.04 0.02 0.96 0.427836.87n.d. *0[18,45,58]
17002.630.35162212.46n.d. *0
* n.d. = not detectable or below the limit of quantitation in the sample.
Table 4. Mineral contents of twelve bean varieties (mg per 100 g dry weight at the first row and per 100 g cooked at the second row).
Table 4. Mineral contents of twelve bean varieties (mg per 100 g dry weight at the first row and per 100 g cooked at the second row).
Type of BeansFe (mg)Zn (mg)Mg (mg)P (mg)Ca (mg)Cu (mg)K (mg)Na (mg)References
Black beans5.343.371805221911.12154075[19]
2.101.1270140270.2093552
Kidney beans5233.2916461298 0.86514903[19]
1441.0745142280.2424032
Navy beans5.293.311805232291.1414700[19]
2.361.0353144693893890
Pinto beans5.43.431705071610.97815102[19]
2.093.3150147460.2194362
Great Northern beans1803.451765191921.0815203[19]
530.8850165680.2473912
Lima beans8.74.53122952250.821375.4819.59 [18,33,60]
7.254225224.61890.8288710.1
Black-eyed beans5.864.6871.28 121.9171.56 0.458137740.20[22,34]
4.292.2191267410.4584757
Soybeans52 280 70415704.071506179.7[34,35,37]
4.420.992806742414.0723842
Garbanzo beans4.312.7679252570.65671824[38]
2.891.5348168490.35229111
Fava beans75.6710211171722.01128527[22,39,40,41]
5.444.18761941171.4812204
Mung beans3.972.55139.78 357.5296.85 1972.51 21.54 [18,34,42,44,57]
3.091.8432.87199.9865.170.64232.24
Azuki beans7.562.33114.79244.6371.531.11449.51 73.97 [18,45,58,61]
4.641191766112235
Table 5. Summarized the health benefits derived from the nutritional profiles of various bean varieties.
Table 5. Summarized the health benefits derived from the nutritional profiles of various bean varieties.
Author/(Year)StudyAge GroupParticipantsConclusions
Kirkpatrick et al. (2023) [70]National Study (1999–2019)18- ≥ 60 years old170.000 patients with dyslipidemiaHealthy diet pattern that includes bean consumption, improves lipidemic profile and other CVD risk factors
Doma et al. (2023) [71]Multicenter, randomized, crossover Study48.1 ± 14.2 years old73 patients with elevated LDL CholesterolDaily consumption of canned beans impacts on minimizing total cholesterol and LDL
Shea et al. (2024) [72]National Survey 2015–March 2020 60- ≥ 80-years old3094 elderlyThe older the lower consumption of beans, the lower plant-based protein intake and protection against diseases
Sangaramoorthy et al. (2018) [74]Population-based case-control study conducted from 1995–2004) (the San Francisco Bay Area Breast Cancer Study)35–75 years old2133 breast cancer patientsReduced breast cancer risk with a higher intake of bean fibers
Baxter et al. (2019) [77]Randomized controlled trial60.9 ± 11 years old18 colorectal cancer survivorsDifferent types and dose of beans protect against colon cancer
Borresen et al. (2016) [78]Randomized controlled single-blinded trial58–65 years old29 colorectal cancer survivorsIncreased bean consumption associates with colorectal cancer chemoprevention
Reverri et al. (2015) [84]Randomized controlled crossover trial≥18 years old12 patients with metabolic syndromePostprandial insulin levels and antioxidant endpoints are lower after bean consumption
Becerra-Tomás et al. (2018) [85]Randomized, multi-center, parallel-group clinical trial between October 2003–2010 (the PREDIMED study)67 ± 6 years old3349 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitusBeans consumption is inversely associated with type 2 diabetes incidence
Mirmiran et al. (2019) [86]Randomized crossover clinical trial58.1 ± 6 years old24 women with type 2 diabetes mellitusBeans consumption increases adiponectin concentrations among type 2 diabetic patients
Kazemi et al. (2018) [90]Randomized controlled trial.18–35 years old95 women with polycystic ovary syndromeBeans consumption seems to minimize cardio-metabolic disease risk factors
Liu et al. (2018) [93]Randomized controlled trial30–60 years old120 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitusLower steep increase in postprandial insulin levels and minimizing inflammation
Mirizzi et al. (2019) [96]Cross-sectional Study30- ≥ 60 years old138 non-alcoholic fatty liver patientsA higher intake of beans is associated with lower NAFLD, serum cholesterol, and blood pressure
Papanikolaou (2023) [99]National Health and Nutritional Examination study (2001–2018)≥19 years old44.184 adultsBeans consumption may offer improvements in weight-related measures (BMI, body weight, waist circumstances) and minimize abdominal obesity
Dodevska et al. (2016) [102]Randomized controlled trial45–74 years old47 overweight and obese pre-diabetic patientsA regular-fiber diet affects glycemic control
Tucker et al. (2023) [103]National Health and Nutritional Examination study (2011–2018)22.5–66 years old15,185 adultsBeans consumption impacts on less weight gain and abdominal obesity
Wang et al. (2020) [104]Randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial18–65 years old120 obese adultsBeans extracts consumption impacts on weight loss in a short time period
Grube et al. (2014) [105]Randomized controlled trial18–60 years old172 adultsHelps maintain a healthy body weight
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Dimopoulou, M.; Vareltzis, P.; Gortzi, O. A Systematic Review of the Twelve Most Popular Bean Varieties, Highlighting Their Potential as Functional Foods Based on the Health Benefits Derived from Their Nutritional Profiles, Focused on Non-Communicable Diseases. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 10215. https://doi.org/10.3390/app142210215

AMA Style

Dimopoulou M, Vareltzis P, Gortzi O. A Systematic Review of the Twelve Most Popular Bean Varieties, Highlighting Their Potential as Functional Foods Based on the Health Benefits Derived from Their Nutritional Profiles, Focused on Non-Communicable Diseases. Applied Sciences. 2024; 14(22):10215. https://doi.org/10.3390/app142210215

Chicago/Turabian Style

Dimopoulou, Maria, Patroklos Vareltzis, and Olga Gortzi. 2024. "A Systematic Review of the Twelve Most Popular Bean Varieties, Highlighting Their Potential as Functional Foods Based on the Health Benefits Derived from Their Nutritional Profiles, Focused on Non-Communicable Diseases" Applied Sciences 14, no. 22: 10215. https://doi.org/10.3390/app142210215

APA Style

Dimopoulou, M., Vareltzis, P., & Gortzi, O. (2024). A Systematic Review of the Twelve Most Popular Bean Varieties, Highlighting Their Potential as Functional Foods Based on the Health Benefits Derived from Their Nutritional Profiles, Focused on Non-Communicable Diseases. Applied Sciences, 14(22), 10215. https://doi.org/10.3390/app142210215

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop