MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974762170 · doi:10.1080/21551197.2014.927304

Characterizing Commercial Pureed Foods: Sensory, Nutritional, and Textural Analysis

2014· article· en· W1974762170 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laurel Ettinger, Heather Keller, Lisa M. Duizer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nutrition in Gerontology and Geriatrics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFood scienceSensory analysisRecipeBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dysphagia (swallowing impairment) is a common consequence of stroke and degenerative diseases such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's. Limited research is available on pureed foods, specifically the qualities of commercial products. Because research has linked pureed foods, specifically in-house pureed products, to malnutrition due to inferior sensory and nutritional qualities, commercial purees also need to be investigated. Proprietary research on sensory attributes of commercial foods is available; however direct comparisons of commercial pureed foods have never been reported. Descriptive sensory analysis as well as nutritional and texture analysis of commercially pureed prepared products was performed using a trained descriptive analysis panel. The pureed foods tested included four brands of carrots, of turkey, and two of bread. Each commercial puree was analyzed for fat (Soxhlet), protein (Dumas), carbohydrate (proximate analysis), fiber (total fiber), and sodium content (Quantab titrator strips). The purees were also texturally compared with a line spread test and a back extrusion test. Differences were found in the purees for sensory attributes as well as nutritional and textural properties. Findings suggest that implementation of standards is required to reduce variability between products, specifically regarding the textural components of the products. This would ensure all commercial products available in Canada meet standards established as being considered safe for swallowing.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nutrition in Gerontology and GeriatricsSame topicSensory Analysis and Statistical MethodsFrench-language works237,207