Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37266412›Full record

ArticleCurrent research in food science2023

Recommendations for validating hierarchical clustering in consumer sensory projects.

Attila Gere

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current research in food science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Neurophysiological Responses to Inhalation ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. EEG neurosubtyping of infants predicts language trajectories.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

1 author.

Attila GereHungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Institute of Food Science and Technology, Department of Postharvest, Supply Chain, Commerce and Sensory Science, Villányi út, 29-43, H-1118, Budapest, Hungary.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Choosing the proper hierarchical clustering algorithm and number of clusters is always a key question in consumer sensory projects. In many cases, researchers do not publish any reason why it was chosen a given distance measure and linkage rule along with cluster numbers. The reason behind this could be that different cluster validation and comparison techniques give contradictory results in most cases. A complex evaluation to define the proper clustering might be time-consuming and tedious. The paper introduces the clustering of three sensory data sets using different distance metrics and linkage rules for different numbers of clusters. The results of the validation methods deviate, suggesting that clustering depends heavily on the data set in question. Although Euclidean distance, Ward's method seems a safe choice, testing, and validation of different clustering combinations is strongly suggested.

Indexed as

Cluster numbersDistance measureHierarchical clusteringSensory

Identifiers

PMID37266412
PMCPMC10230197

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.