ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Validation of the Coffee Cuality™ Method for the Expert Assessment of Coffee Sensory Quality.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Oak aging mitigates the sensory impact of smoke taint in Cabernet Sauvignon wine.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Coffee Cuality Method provides a comprehensive assessment of the sensory quality of coffee that includes an overall quality rating, just-about-right (JAR) scaling of select attributes, check-all-that-apply (CATA) selections from a list of sensory and holistic attributes and open comments. We validated the method with 56 expert coffee tasters by comparing Coffee Cuality with their customary method (i.e., SCA's, Q-grading or company's own) for the evaluation of the sensory quality of 12 specialty coffees and commercial blends brewed with their preferred method (cupping, drip, pour over or espresso). A subset of 18 experts then participated in focus groups on the method. Quality mapping (principal component and cluster analyses of the quality ratings) showed consistency among the experts' overall quality ratings regardless of brewing method, with the dark roasts rated systematically lower than the light- and medium-roasted coffees. Penalty analysis relating JAR ratings to quality scores showed that too dark of a roast or a beverage color and too low of an acidity had the largest (negative) impact on quality. The map of sensory and holistic attributes derived from CATA selections by correspondence analysis, and the word clouds of those selections showed which attributes drove quality ratings, positively or negatively. Focus groups with a subset of the experts suggested improvements to the evaluation protocol and scorecard. By deconstructing, documenting and justifying coffee quality ratings, Coffee Cuality offers a valuable alternative to conventional evaluation protocols.
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.