ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2024
Differences in cooking taste and physicochemical properties between compound nutritional rice and common rice.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing Quick Screening Method to Identify Rice Cultivars with Unique Aromatic Features.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Physicochemical characteristics and metabolomic profiling of representative rice cultivars distinct in eating quality.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Effects of Cooking Techniques on the Nutritional Profile, Glycemic Index, and Sensory Evaluation of Rice: A Systematic Review.Preventive nutrition and food science · 2025Review
- Analyses of the Differences in Nutritional Quality and Volatile Aroma Compounds in Potato-Based Reconstituted Rice Produced from Different Potato Varieties.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, it was compared the physicochemical properties and cooking taste quality between four different types of compound nutritional rice (rice flour with the addition of other coarse grains, legumes, potatoes, and other powders, extruded as artificial rice grains) and common rice. We found that the protein and apparent amylose contents of compound nutritional rice were higher than that of common rice, up to 9.775% and 19.45% respectively. The γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) and resistant starch contents were much lower than in common rice, and the dietary fiber content did not differ from that in common rice. The results of Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) and X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis revealed that the starch properties and structure of the compound nutritional rice changed due to high temperature and high pressure processing. In particular, the crystalline structures of starch became V-shaped. In addition, the results of artificial tasting and tasting meter showed that the taste of compound nutritional rice was generally inferior to that of common rice. In summary, compound nutritional rice had problems such as nutritional imbalance and poor taste. There was still a lot of room for improving the taste quality of compound nutritional rice. Therefore, the future development of compound nutritional rice should focus on both nutritional balance and taste improvement. The results of this paper also provided a certain theoretical basis for this.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.