ArticleThe Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology2020
Bitter Taste Perception of the Human Tongue Mediated by Quinine and Caffeine Impregnated Taste Strips.
Article in The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bitter Compounds in Medicinal Food Plants Based on Traditional Chinese Medicine: Analysis and Regulation Strategies from Chemical Structure to Perception Mechanisms.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Crushing tablets or sprinkling capsules: Implications for clinical strategy and study performance based on BE studies of rivaroxaban and deferasirox.Clinical and translational science · 2024Review
- One of the major challenges of masking the bitter taste in medications: an overview of quantitative methods for bitterness.Frontiers in chemistry · 2024Review
- Sex Differences in the Bitterness Perception of an Aromatic Myrtle Bitter Liqueur and Bitter Compounds.Nutrients · 2023Article
- Recent Advances in Bitterness-Sensing Systems.Biosensors · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTests for gustatory function have become increasingly important in diagnosis and treatment of patients with taste disorders. While caffeine and quinine hydrochloride solutions have been used for global testing of bitter perception, only quinine has been used to test regional bitter perception by means of taste strips. The aim of the present study was to validate caffeine impregnated taste strips as an alternative to quinine taste strips for assessment of regional bitter perception.
methodsA total of 46 healthy volunteers (mean age/range, 23/19-27 years) were included in this study. Quinine and caffeine impregnated taste strips were pairwise presented at different parts of the tongue. Perceived intensity and hedonic dislike were evaluated using labeled magnitude scales. Additionally, gustatory function was assessed using the taste strips test and overall sense of taste was rated using visual analog scales.
resultsAssessment of gustatory function demonstrated scores within the normogeusic range in most included subjects (mean/SD, 13.1/2.5). Notably, equally concentrated quinine and caffeine impregnated taste strips placed on different regions of the tongue did not lead to significant differences in perceived intensity or hedonic dislike, whereas quinine and caffeine impregnated taste strips of different concentrations placed on the same region on the tongue led to significant differences of perceived intensity and hedonic dislike. Furthermore, no correlation was found between self-assessment of gustatory function and taste strips scores.
conclusionCaffeine seems to be a valid bitter compound for regional testing using taste strips and may be used alternatively to quinine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.