Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34066774›Full record

ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Oral Sensitivity to Flowability and Food Neophobia Drive Food Preferences and Choice.

Sharon Puleo, Paolo Masi, Silvana Cavella, Rossella Di Monaco

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sharon PuleoCenter of Food Innovation and Development in the Food Industry, University of Naples Federico II, 80055 Portici, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5380-9178
Paolo MasiCenter of Food Innovation and Development in the Food Industry, University of Naples Federico II, 80055 Portici, Italy.
Silvana CavellaCenter of Food Innovation and Development in the Food Industry, University of Naples Federico II, 80055 Portici, Italy.
Rossella Di MonacoCenter of Food Innovation and Development in the Food Industry, University of Naples Federico II, 80055 Portici, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4402-4023
University of Naples Federico II · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The study aimed to investigate the role of sensitivity to flowability on food liking and choice, the relationship between sensitivity to flowability and food neophobia, and its role in food liking. Five chocolate creams were prepared with different levels of flowability, and rheological measurements were performed to characterise them. One hundred seventy-six subjects filled in the Food Neophobia Scale and a food choice questionnaire (FCq). The FCq was developed to evaluate preferences within a pair of food items similar in flavour but different in texture. Secondly, the subjects evaluated their liking for creams (labelled affective magnitude (LAM) scale) and the flowability intensity (generalised labelled magnitude (gLM) scale). The subjects were clustered into three groups of sensitivity and two groups of choice preference. The effect of individual flowability sensitivity on food choice was investigated. Finally, the subjects were clustered into two groups according to their food neophobia level. The sensitivity to flowability significantly affected the liking of chocolate creams and the solid food choice. The liking of chocolate creams was also affected by the individual level of neophobia (

Indexed as

food likingpsychological traitstexture sensitivity

Identifiers

PMID34066774
PMCPMC8150315
OpenAlexW3161242881

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.