Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39940503›Full record

ArticlePolymers2025

Effect of Hydrocolloids on Penetration Tests, Sensory Evaluation, and Syneresis of Milk Pudding.

Hong-Ting Victor Lin, Jenn-Shou Tsai, Hsiao-Hui Liao, Wen-Chieh Sung

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Polymers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors.

Hong-Ting Victor LinDepartment of Food Science, National Taiwan Ocean University, Keelung 20231, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-8737-208X
Jenn-Shou TsaiDepartment of Food Science, National Taiwan Ocean University, Keelung 20231, Taiwan.
Hsiao-Hui LiaoDepartment of Food Science, National Taiwan Ocean University, Keelung 20231, Taiwan.
Wen-Chieh SungDepartment of Food Science, National Taiwan Ocean University, Keelung 20231, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0001-8318-8114

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study evaluated how added gums, starch amounts, and sucrose levels affect the texture, sensory acceptability, and syneresis of milk puddings. The puddings were prepared with four ingredients, namely 0.3% polysaccharide (κ,ι-carrageenan, gellan gum, gelatin, or agar), 2.5-7.5% sucrose, 1-5% modified waxy corn starch, and whole milk. The physical and sensory properties were assessed through measurements of gel strength, breaking point, breaking force, rigidity, and hedonic testing. Results show that syneresis increased in all milk puddings during two weeks of refrigerated storage. Among the five polysaccharides, agar and κ-carrageenan showed the most significant effect on gel rigidity and strength, while gellan gum and ι-carrageenan were more effective at preventing syneresis compared to three commercial milk pudding products after 14 days of storage. As modified corn starch concentration increased (1 to 5%), gel strength, breaking force, and rigidity decreased. Lower modified waxy corn starch concentrations (5% to 1%) led to reduced syneresis when stored at 4 °C for 7 and 14 days. Sucrose significantly increased gel strength and breaking force in puddings containing κ-carrageenan, gellan gum, and agar. Gellan gum improved overall pudding acceptability. Based on sensory and syneresis data, the most acceptable milk pudding formulation contained 5% sucrose, 0.3% gellan gum, and 1% modified waxy corn starch.

Indexed as

agarcarrageenansgellan gummilk puddingpenetration testsensory evaluationsyneresis

Identifiers

PMID39940503
PMCPMC11820735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.