ArticleJournal of sensory studies2022
Comparison of Chinese and American subjects on the self-administered Waterless Empirical Taste Test.
Article in Journal of sensory studies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Self-Administered Taste Testing Without Water: Normative Data for the 53-Item Waterless Empirical Taste Test (WETT).International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2025Article
- SARS-CoV-2-induced sensory perturbations: A narrative review of clinical phenotypes, molecular pathologies, and possible interventions.Brain, behavior, & immunity - health · 2025Review
- Long-Term Taste and Smell Outcomes After COVID-19.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Effect of oral zinc and steroids on long COVID hyposmia and hypogeusia.SAGE open medicine · 2024Article
- Effect of Age and Gender on Taste Function as Measured by the Waterless Empirical Taste Test.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- [The application of waterless empirical taste test（WETTLin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2023Article
- Comparison of Chinese and American subjects on the self-administered Waterless Empirical Taste Test.Journal of sensory studies · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cultural differences have been reported between the taste sensitivity of persons of Asian and European ancestry, although findings have been mixed. This study sought to determine whether American and Chinese adults perform differently on a novel taste test that requires no water, can be self-administered, and employs a representative of umami as one of its tastants. This 53-trial test was administered to 113 Chinese and 214 Americans. The subjects orally sampled monomer cellulose pads containing one of four dried concentrations of sucrose, citric acid, NaCl, caffeine, and monosodium glutamate and indicated whether a sweet, sour, bitter, salty, brothy, or no taste sensation was perceived. Separate gender by culture analyses of covariance with age as the covariate were performed on the total score and the scores of each taste stimulus. For all taste qualities, women outperformed men and test scores declined with age. No difference between American and Chinese subjects was found for the total taste score (
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.