Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32650432›Full record

ReviewMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Taste Processing: Insights from Animal Models.

Andrés Molero-Chamizo, Guadalupe Nathzidy Rivera-Urbina

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Andrés Molero-ChamizoDepartment of Psychology, Psychobiology Area, University of Huelva, Campus El Carmen, 21071 Huelva, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-0381-8927
Guadalupe Nathzidy Rivera-UrbinaFaculty of administrative and social sciences, Autonomous University of Baja California, Tijuana 22890, Mexico.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Taste processing is an adaptive mechanism involving complex physiological, motivational and cognitive processes. Animal models have provided relevant data about the neuroanatomical and neurobiological components of taste processing. From these models, two important domains of taste responses are described in this review. The first part focuses on the neuroanatomical and neurophysiological bases of olfactory and taste processing. The second part describes the biological and behavioral characteristics of taste learning, with an emphasis on conditioned taste aversion as a key process for the survival and health of many species, including humans.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAmygdalaAnimalsAvoidance LearningBrain MappingConditioning, PsychologicalHumansOlfactory PerceptionTaste Perceptionflavourmolecular signallingolfactory processingreceptorstaste learningtaste processing

Identifiers

PMID32650432
PMCPMC7397205

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.