ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Exploring Texture and Biomechanics of Food Oral Processing in Fork-Mashable Dishes for Patients with Mastication or Swallowing Impairments.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Food characterization in the omics era: current advances, analytical approaches, and future perspectives.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
- The Effectiveness of Fork-Mashable Dishes in Managing Older Patients with Mastication and Swallowing Impairments.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Texture-modified diets (TMDs) are a primary compensatory treatment for hospitalized older patients with swallowing and mastication disorders. Nevertheless, the lack of a protocol for evaluating their objective textural properties hampers their industrialization and optimal patient care.
objectivesThis study aimed (a) to evaluate the textural properties (maximum force, cohesiveness, and adhesiveness) and biomechanics of food oral processing (mastication cycles, time, and frequency) of ten fork-mashable dishes (Texture E BDA/IDDSI level 6), (b) to explore the impact of oral processing on texture, and (c) to measure the properties of the ready-to-swallow bolus (RSB) in healthy adults.
methodsThe textural properties (maximum force, cohesiveness, and adhesiveness) of ten dishes were analyzed with a texture analyzer before and after oral processing (RSB) in five healthy adults (30 ± 3.9, 3 women). Surface electromyography was used to measure mastication cycles, time, and frequency.
resultsThe pre-mastication Texture Profile Analysis (TPA)-averaged values of maximum force ranged from 0.65 to 2.73 N, cohesiveness was 0.49-0.87, and adhesiveness was 0.01-0.95 N·s. Masticatory Cycles (46.87-19.13 MC) and time (36.73-15.80 S) from whole samples to RSB greatly and significantly differed among dishes, although frequency did not (1.68-1.11 MC/T). Post-mastication RSB TPA-averaged values of maximum force ranged from 0.70 to 2.24 N; cohesiveness, 0.49-0.73; and adhesiveness, 0.01-1.14 N·s.
conclusionsDespite all dishes being classified by the same qualitative descriptor (BDA level E/IDDSI level 6), there was a large and significant variation in their textural properties (maximum force, cohesiveness, and adhesiveness) when measured in SI units. In addition, in healthy adults, the masticatory cycles and time to achieve RSB greatly differed, whereas masticatory frequency remained quite constant.
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.