ReviewPharmaceutics2024
Critical View on the Qualification of Electronic Tongues Regarding Their Performance in the Development of Peroral Drug Formulations with Bitter Ingredients.
Review in Pharmaceutics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Taste Modulation by Umami Compounds: Mechanisms, Sensor-Based Evaluation, and Pharmaceutical Applications in Bitterness Suppression.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- From Inclusion Complexes to Metabolic Signaling: The Emerging Role of γ-Cyclodextrin in Gut Microbiota and Metabolic Regulation.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- An integrated machine learning framework for TCM five-flavor classification based on E-tongue profiling and SHAP analysis.Chinese medicine · 2026Article
- Electrochemical Sensors as a Tool for Taste Perception in Pharmaceutical Products: Advances and Perspectives.Biosensors · 2026Review
- Targeting the Oral Mucosa: Emerging Drug Delivery Platforms and the Therapeutic Potential of Glycosaminoglycans.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Review
- KollicoatPharmaceutics · 2025Article
- Cyclodextrins: Advances in Chemistry, Toxicology, and Multifaceted Applications.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this review, we aim to highlight the advantages, challenges, and limitations of electronic tongues (e-tongues) in pharmaceutical drug development. The authors, therefore, critically evaluated the performance of e-tongues regarding their qualification to assess peroral formulations containing bitter active pharmaceutical ingredients. A literature search using the keywords 'electronic', 'tongue', 'bitter', and 'drug' in a Web of Science search was therefore initially conducted. Reviewing the publications of the past decade, and further literature where necessary, allowed the authors to discuss whether and how e-tongues perform as expected and whether they have the potential to become a standard tool in drug development. Specifically highlighted are the expectations an e-tongue should meet. Further, a brief insight into the technologies of the utilized e-tongues is given. Reliable protocols were found that enable (i) the qualified performance of e-tongue instruments from an analytical perspective, (ii) proper taste-masking assessments, and (iii) under certain circumstances, the evaluation of bitterness.
Indexed as
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.