ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Rheology, Printability, and Texture of Extrusion-Based 3D-Printed Self-Supporting Soft Gels Formulated with Pea and Chickpea Proteins.
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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Predicting printability and final texture in extrusion-based 3D printing of soft, self-supporting food gels remains challenging, particularly when realistic plant-based ingredients are used instead of simplified model systems. In this study, two plant protein-hydrocolloid inks based on commercial pea protein isolate (PPI) and chickpea protein concentrate (CPC) were developed and compared within the same hydrocolloid framework (0.36% low-acyl gellan gum and 1.00% xanthan gum). The formulations differed in protein ingredient level, moisture content, sorbitol concentration, and salt origin, allowing evaluation of how complete formulation design governs rheology, printability, and texture. The CPC-based ink showed higher yield stress than the PPI-based ink (158.10 ± 18.17 vs. 119.56 ± 18.84 Pa), whereas both inks exhibited similar shear-thinning behavior (
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.