ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Popularizing Wine Tasting Evaluation: An Adaptation of Mouthfeel Terminology.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
Abstract
Wine sensory analysis traditionally relies on complex terminology. This can be challenging to non-expert consumers, particularly regarding mouthfeel sensations. Despite the importance of the latter in determining wine quality and typicity, they lack standardized classification. In this study, we developed and validated a simplified framework for wine taste evaluation that is accessible to consumers with limited tasting experience. The Delphi technique was applied across multiple rounds with a panel of 18 wine experts, primarily sommeliers with experience of diverse consumer profiles. Through an iterative process, attributes were selected from the existing literature and systematically evaluated for relevance, clarity, and accessibility. The validated framework comprises four dimensions: basic tastes (sweetness, acidity, bitterness, salinity, fruitiness); astringency (hardness, dryness, texture); tactile sensations (tingling, warmth, body); and overall evaluation (complexity, balance, taste persistence, alcohol perception). Each attribute includes accessible descriptions and measurement scales anchored with familiar food references to support comparative cognitive processes. All proposed attributes achieved over 85% expert consensus. This framework provides a practical tool that bridges technical wine terminology and everyday consumer language to facilitate communication between industry professionals and consumers. Furthermore, it enables more reliable sensory evaluations in future research and can potentially be extended to other beverages.
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.