Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36721748›Full record

ReviewPreventive nutrition and food science2022

Recent Applications of Potentiometric Electronic Tongue and Electronic Nose in Sensory Evaluation.

Sungeun Cho, Md Shakir Moazzem

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Preventive nutrition and food science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Effects of differentFrontiers in nutrition · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Hydrogel In-Tape Electronic Tongue.ACS applied electronic materials · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Sungeun ChoDepartment of Poultry Science, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36832, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1711-6187
Md Shakir MoazzemDepartment of Poultry Science, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36832, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7494-4456

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electronic tongue (e-tongue) and electronic nose (e-nose) have been widely used to determine food products' taste, aroma, and flavor profiles. Several researchers and industries have recently attempted to find relationships between these e-senses and human sensory panels to ultimately replace sensory panels or use them as a viable alternative to timeconsuming and expensive traditional sensory evaluation (e.g., consumer acceptance testing or descriptive sensory analysis). This study investigated the recent applications of e-tongue and e-nose in the food and beverages sectors and their relationships with human sensory panels, including a trained sensory panel and naïve consumers. According to several studies, the e-tongue, e-nose, or a combination of e-tongue and e-nose can be an effective and powerful tool for rapid assessment of sensory profiles and quality detection with significant correlations with human sensory data. These instruments are also often reported to be more sensitive to detect subtle changes/differences that the human panel cannot detect. Future trends and projections of the e-tongue and e-nose with limitations are also discussed.

Indexed as

electronic noseelectronic tonguee-sensessensory profiles

Identifiers

PMID36721748
PMCPMC9843717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.