Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41950241›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Objective differences and pathway differentiation between twin subtypes within the same IDDSI level: A texture-nutrition analysis based on commonly consumed foods among Chinese elderly.

Muxi Chen, Yi Cheng, Juan Duan, Lei Shi, Yuan Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Muxi ChenDepartment of Clinical Nutrition, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-0981-8767
Yi ChengDepartment of Clinical Nutrition, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Juan DuanDepartment of Clinical Nutrition, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Lei ShiDepartment of Clinical Nutrition, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yuan LiuDepartment of Clinical Nutrition, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study adopts a "pathway-priority" perspective to systematically quantify the texture-moisture-nutrition continuum of elderly-preferred food ingredients commonly consumed in China under the International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) framework. It focuses on intra-level differentiation between "twin-type/pathway pairs" (MO3 vs. LQ3, EX4 vs. PU4, EC7 vs. RG7), aiming to reveal objective distinctions in texture and nutritional orientation across pathways and to provide quantitative evidence for dietary level classification and prescription substitution in dysphagia management.

methodsTwenty-six representative food ingredients were collected from seven major Chinese dietary regions through Python-based web crawling. According to IDDSI classification, samples were grouped into the liquid pathway (Levels 0-2, MO3, EX4) and food pathway (LQ3, PU4, Levels 5-7 including EC7/RG7). A TA.New Plus texture analyzer was used to measure hardness, adhesiveness, and cohesiveness. Nutritional components per 100 g-including energy, protein, fat, carbohydrate, and dietary fiber-were calculated using Huaxi Hospital Nutrition software. Statistical analyses included Mann-Whitney U tests with Cliff's δ for twin-type comparisons, Spearman correlation and Theil-Sen slope analysis for monotonic trends within pathways, and Kruskal-Wallis followed by Dunn-Bonferroni tests for intra-level differences among food categories. False discovery rate (FDR-BH) correction was applied, with significance set at q ≤ 0.05.

results(1) In twin-type comparisons, MO3, EX4, and EC7 exhibited significantly lower hardness and energy density but higher moisture content (q ≤ 0.05), whereas LQ3, PU4, and RG7 contained higher energy and protein levels, reflecting hydration-safety orientation in liquid pathways versus structural-nutritional orientation in food pathways. (2) Within-pathway analyses showed that the liquid pathway (Levels 0 → 4) followed a "thickening-hardening-dehydrating" monotonic trend, with increasing hardness and energy but decreasing adhesiveness and moisture. The food pathway (Levels 3 → 7) displayed a "structuring-hardening-dehydrating-energizing" trajectory, indicating enhanced granularity and nutritional concentration. (3) Significant texture differences among food categories within the same level were observed (ε² = 0.37-0.67, q ≤ 0.05), suggesting that "same level ≠ interchangeable.". (4) The established "safety-nutrition balance window" identified key control zones: moisture 88.9-96.8 g/100 g and hardness 100-160 N/m² for MO3/EX4, and energy 70-324 kcal/100 g for PU4/RG7, providing practical references for clinical and process optimization.

conclusionTwin subtypes within the same IDDSI level exhibit systematic differences in texture and nutrition, confirming the hypothesis that "same level ≠ interchangeable." The liquid pathway emphasizes safety and hydration, while the food pathway prioritizes structure and nutrient density. By constructing an intra-pathway "texture-nutrition continuum" and safety-nutrition balance window, this study offers quantitative evidence for pathway selection, diet prescription, and quality control in dysphagia management. Future work should integrate VFSS/FEES imaging and clinical outcomes to map laboratory metrics to swallowing safety, facilitating translation from experimental assessment to clinical application.

Indexed as

DietFood AnalysisChinaHumansNutritive Value

Identifiers

PMID41950241
PMCPMC13061176

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.