ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Cross-Cultural Comparison of the Espresso Protocol Repeatability.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Espresso Protocol (TEP) was used to assess the quality of coffee beans through espresso extraction incorporating a sensory approach. TEP includes overall quality evaluation and attribute evaluation using check-all-that-apply (CATA). This study aims to evaluate the repeatability of TEP when used by experts and to compare cross-cultural assessments to determine its applicability across different countries with diverse coffee cultures. Experts with over three years of experience in the coffee industry from five countries-France (n = 7), India (n = 12), Italy (n = 7), the Republic of Korea (n = 10), and the USA (n = 10)-participated in our study. The experiment was conducted in three replications using eight different single-origin coffee samples over two or three consecutive days. Cluster analysis using CATA data was performed to verify the repeatability of individual participants in the characterization of espresso samples, revealing that most participants were repeatable in their three-time evaluations. Moreover, a significant homogeneity index demonstrated a high degree of similarity in the sensory characteristics used by experts from each country, although cultural differences were observed in the terminology used to describe coffee. In conclusion, the repeatability of individual experts and the reliability of TEP were successfully demonstrated. However, some differences in sensory evaluations were noted across cultures; these were likely influenced by differences in the use of terminology, which emphasizes the need for training in the coffee lexicon.
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.