Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32858903›Full record

ArticleNutrients2020

Differences in Sweet Taste Perception and Its Association with the

Anna Jurczak, Małgorzata Jamka-Kasprzyk, Zuzanna Bębenek, Małgorzata Staszczyk, Paweł Jagielski, Dorota Kościelniak, Iwona Gregorczyk-Maga, Iwona Kołodziej, Magdalena Kępisty, Magdalena Kukurba-Setkowicz and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Interplay of Sweet Taste Perception andInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Oral Microbiota-Host Interaction Mediated by Taste Receptors.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
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

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anna JurczakDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Institute of Dentistry, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Montelupich 4, 31-155 Cracow, Poland.
Małgorzata Jamka-KasprzykDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Institute of Dentistry, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Montelupich 4, 31-155 Cracow, Poland.
Zuzanna BębenekDepartment of Mycology, Collegium Medicum, Jagiellonian University, Czysta St 18, 31-121 Cracow, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-2958-4412
Małgorzata StaszczykDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Institute of Dentistry, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Montelupich 4, 31-155 Cracow, Poland.
Paweł JagielskiDepartment of Nutrition and Drug Research, Faculty of Health Science, Collegium Medicum, Jagiellonian University, Grzegórzecka St 20, 31-531 Cracow, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-7583-8965
Dorota KościelniakDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Institute of Dentistry, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Montelupich 4, 31-155 Cracow, Poland.
Iwona Gregorczyk-MagaDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Institute of Dentistry, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Montelupich 4, 31-155 Cracow, Poland.
Iwona KołodziejDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Institute of Dentistry, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Montelupich 4, 31-155 Cracow, Poland.
Magdalena KępistyDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Institute of Dentistry, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Montelupich 4, 31-155 Cracow, Poland.
Magdalena Kukurba-SetkowiczDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Institute of Dentistry, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Montelupich 4, 31-155 Cracow, Poland.
Amira BryllDepartment of Radiology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kopernika 19, 31-501 Cracow, Poland.
Wirginia KrzyściakDepartment of Medical Diagnostics, Faculty of Pharmacy, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Medyczna 9, 30-688 Cracow, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-0452-295X
Jagiellonian University · PL

Funding

Jagiellonian University Medical College N41/DBS/000163, N41/DBS/000357, N41/DBS/000162
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the study was to verify the hypothesis about differences in sweet taste perception in the group of preschool children with and without caries, and to determine its relationship with cariogenic microbiota and the frequency of sweets consumption in children. The study group included of 63 children aged 2-6 years: 32 with caries and 31 without caries. The study consisted of collecting questionnaire data and assessment of dental status using the decayed, missing, filled in primary teeth index (dmft) and the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS II). The evaluation of sweet taste perception was carried out using a specific method that simultaneously assessed the level of taste preferences and the sensitivity threshold for a given taste. The microbiological analysis consisted of the assessment of the quantitative and qualitative compositions of the oral microbiota of the examined children. The sweet taste perception of children with caries was characterized by a lower susceptibility to sucrose (the preferred sucrose solution concentration was >4 g/L) compared to children without caries (in the range ≤ 4 g/L,

Indexed as

Streptococcus mutansChildChild, PreschoolDental CariesDietary SucroseFemaleFood PreferencesHumansMaleTaste PerceptionTaste ThresholdDietary Sucroseearly childhood caries (ECC)eating habitsmicrobial dysbiosisTaste preferences

Identifiers

PMID32858903
PMCPMC7551438
OpenAlexW3080551228

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.