Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40754837›Full record

ReviewComprehensive reviews in food science and food safety2025

Initiating Sensory Science Research in Space Conditions-Current Practices and Future Perspectives.

Thejani Prabodha, Lukas Danner, Gail N Iles, Martina Heer, Isabelle Mack, Charles Brennan, Julia Low

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

7 authors.

Thejani PrabodhaSensory and Consumer Science Research Group, School of Science, RMIT University, Bundoora West Campus, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia.
Lukas DannerAgriculture and Food, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Werribee, Victoria, Australia.
Gail N IlesSpace Physics Group, School of Science, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Martina HeerIU International University of Applied Sciences, Erfurt, Germany.
Isabelle MackDepartment of Internal Medicine VI, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Charles BrennanSTEM College, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Julia LowSensory and Consumer Science Research Group, School of Science, RMIT University, Bundoora West Campus, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6882-2877

Funding

Prabodha's PhD Scholarship, RMIT University
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Space exploration continues to drive technological and scientific advancements, benefiting both space and Earth. This expanding sector, including commercial space stations, deep-space missions, and space tourism, presents unique challenges and opportunities for food researchers. A critical issue is the limited understanding of how space conditions such as microgravity, isolation, and confinement affect sensory perception, impacting astronauts' nutritional intake and psychological well-being. This review based on a structured literature search strategy integrates existing data on flavor perception during spaceflight missions (n = 16), identifying sensory changes, altered flavor preferences, and cravings linked to space-related stressors. It also evaluates space analogs and simulations related to sensory research (n = 29), assessing their applicability for studying food perception in space conditions. It identified consistent sensory changes, including diminished taste sensitivity, increased preference for spicy or umami‑rich foods, and intense flavors. However, research in this area remains limited, with small sample sizes, inconsistent methodologies, and lack of comprehensive guidelines on applying analogs and simulations in sensory studies. These gaps raise challenges for researchers, particularly those without access to space analogs or simulations, in designing space-related studies. Critically analyzing the findings, the review identifies gaps in understanding the complex interactions between environmental, physiological, and sensory factors. It also outlines potential methodological pathways to strengthen future evidence generation, such as implementing ecologically valid research approaches and validated analog designs, including combined use of multiple analog environments to better replicate the multidimensional sensory context. Addressing these challenges will support astronaut well-being and foster innovations that benefit both space and Earth-based applications.

Indexed as

Space FlightAstronautsFood PreferencesHumansTasteWeightlessnessastronaut dietconfined environmentsextraterrestrial habitatsisolation and confinementlunar gravityMars missionsmicrogravitysensory adaptationsensory perceptionspace analogsspace flavorspaceflightspace foodspace nutrition

Identifiers

PMID40754837
PMCPMC12319303

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.