ArticleJournal of oral rehabilitation2026
Which Norm of Mixing Ability Index to Evaluate Deficiency in Masticatory Performance in Young Adults?
Article in Journal of oral rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Dental Malocclusions on Age and Gender-Related Masticatory Performance in Orthodontic Patients.Journal of oral rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Which Norm of Mixing Ability Index to Evaluate Deficiency in Masticatory Performance in Young Adults?Journal of oral rehabilitation · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe two-coloured chewing gum test is widely used to quantify oral mixing ability. Lack of consensual normative reference values limits its interpretation and comparability across studies.
objectiveTo present the methodology establishing normative reference cut-offs for masticatory mixing ability in healthy young adults using two-coloured chewing gums.
methodsData from 61 healthy individuals (22.08 ± 2.22 years) who fulfilled anatomical (≥ 7 posterior functional units), psychosocial (GOHAI ≥ 52) and physiological (carrot D50 < 4 mm) criteria for good oral health were considered. Mixing ability was measured after 5 cycles, 20 cycles and 1 min with two different gum types (Hue-Check Gum and Hollywood gum). Outcomes were SD-Hue and Mix%.
resultsMix% increased significantly from 5 to 20 cycles for both gums and approached maximal values after 1 min (p < 0.001). At 20 cycles, mean Mix% was 81.06% (95% CI: 78.46-83.66) for Hollywood and 88.31% (95% CI: 85.44-91.17) for Hue-Check Gum. Corresponding mean SD-Hue values were 0.076 (95% CI: 0.068-0.084) and 0.108 (95% CI: 0.085-0.131), respectively. Normative reference cut-offs at 20 cycles were defined using the lower bound of the 95% CI for Mix% (78.46% for Hollywood and 85.44% for Hue-Check Gum) and the upper bound of the 95% CI for SD-Hue (0.084 for Hollywood and 0.131 for Hue-Check Gum).
conclusionNormative reference cut-offs for the two-coloured chewing gum test are provided for healthy young adults, enabling standardized interpretation of mixing outcomes. However, their applicability across other age groups is needed.
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.