ArticleJournal of food science2025
Consumer perception of meal replacement beverages: A comparison between younger adults and older adults.
Article in Journal of food science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric Evaluation of the Persian Version of Adult Food Preferences Questionnaire (FPQ-Adult).Current developments in nutrition · 2026Article
- Consumer Insights into "Clean Label" High-Fat, Low-Carbohydrate Protein Bars.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Consumer perception of meal replacement beverages: A comparison between younger adults and older adults.Journal of food science · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Meal replacement beverages (MRBs) are consumed by a wide variety of consumers for different reasons. This study evaluated how younger adults (n = 62; aged 18-35) and older adults (n = 63; aged 65 or older) perceive MRBs. The participants started by identifying how they define MRBs. Then, the participants evaluated the sensory properties of five different chocolate-flavored MRBs using hedonic scales and the check-all-that-apply (CATA) method. Participants also identified which factors were important when consuming and purchasing MRBs. The participants highlighted that MRBs should be filling (high satiety) and have nutritional benefits. Both groups of consumers separated the MRBs based on their ingredients (plant-based or dairy-based) and liked MRBs that were sweet, chocolatey, creamy, and salty. The older adults' liking decreased due to the perception of astringency, while younger adults' liking decreased due to bitterness and off-flavors. The older adults also placed greater importance on fiber content, diabetic friendly, satiety, and calcium content than the younger adults, while the younger adults were interested in plant-based and vegan MRBs more so than the older adults. Overall, the sensory perception and hedonic liking were similar between the two groups, but their consumption factors differed. PRACTICAL APPLICATION: Understanding consumption, as well as younger and older adults' sensory perception of MRBs, should allow the food industry to create new varieties of MRBs that are well-liked by consumers of different ages. Furthermore, this study identified how consumers currently conceptualize MRBs and why they consume or are interested in MRBs.
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.