Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33154787›Full record

ArticleChemosensory perception2017

Prediction of stevia liking by sucrose liking: Effects of beverage background.

Stephanie Oleson, Claire Murphy

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chemosensory perception, 2017. 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
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephanie OlesonDepartment of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA.
Claire MurphyDepartment of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA.
San Diego State University · US

Funding

Chemosensory Perception &Psychophysics in the AgedR01AG004085 · NIA · SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI MURPHY, CLAIRE L · 1986 to 2015
$3.4M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG004085
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is significant concern over the health implications of increased consumption of sugars added to foods and beverages. Understanding the increase in sugar intake, as well as consideration of potential substitutes will require research in multiple domains. Research on hedonic ratings of sucrose suggests that individuals can be classified into two distinct liking profiles: sweet likers and sweet non-likers. However, no known studies have investigated liking for the natural, nonnutritive sweetener, stevia. The present study aimed to investigate the relationship between liking of stevia and sucrose as a function of beverage background.

methodsForty young adults, 20 high concentration and 20 moderate concentration stevia likers, gave intensity and pleasantness ratings for stevia blend and sucrose taste solutions that varied in concentration and background.

resultsThe results revealed a significant relationship between stevia blend liking and sucrose liking. The majority of stevia high concentration likers were high concentration sucrose likers. Pleasantness ratings also significantly varied as a function of background: the discrepancy in pleasantness ratings between stevia blend high concentration likers and moderate concentration likers observed in distilled water was attenuated in a citric beverage background.

conclusionsThe majority of high concentration stevia likers were sucrose likers; however, pleasantness ratings also significantly varied as a function of stimulus background. IMPLICATIONS: Limiting sucrose in the modern diet is an important research area for diabetes and other health issues. The results suggest that perception of pleasantness and sweetness at varying sweetener concentrations is not fully generalizable from one beverage background to another.

Indexed as

likingsteviasucrosesweet tastetaste

Identifiers

PMID33154787
PMCPMC7641516
OpenAlexW2730587135

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.