ORCID Profile
0000-0002-5175-6276
Current Organisation
University of Florence
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2022
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 10-09-2018
Abstract: Despite considerable research investigating the role of 6-n-propylthiouracil bitterness perception and variation of fungiform papillae density in food perception, this relationship remains controversial as well as the association between the 2 phenotypes. Data from 1119 subjects (38.6% male 18-60 years) enrolled in the Italian Taste project were analyzed. Responsiveness to the bitterness of 6-n-propylthiouracil was assessed on the general Labeled Magnitude Scale. Fungiform papillae density was determined from manual counting on digital images of the tongue. Solutions of tastes, astringent, and pungent sensations were prepared to be moderate/strong on a general Labeled Magnitude Scale. Four foods had tastants added to produce 4 variations in target sensations from weak to strong (pear juice: citric acid, sourness chocolate pudding: sucrose, sweetness bean purée: sodium chloride, saltiness and tomato juice: capsaicin, pungency). Women gave ratings to 6-n-propylthiouracil and showed fungiform papillae density that was significantly higher than men. Both phenotype markers significantly decreased with age. No significant correlations were found between 6-n-propylthiouracil ratings and fungiform papillae density. Fungiform papillae density variation does not affect perceived intensity of solutions. Responsiveness to 6-n-propylthiouracil positively correlated to perceived intensity of most stimuli in solution. A significant effect of fungiform papillae density on perceived intensity of target sensation in foods was found in a few cases. Responsiveness to 6-n-propylthiouracil positively affected all taste intensities in subjects with low fungiform papillae density whereas there were no significant effects of 6-n-propylthiouracil in those with high fungiform papillae density. These data highlight a complex interplay between 6-n-propylthiouracil status and fungiform papillae density and the need of a critical reconsideration of their role in food perception and acceptability.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 09-2018
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 25-12-2020
Abstract: In a preregistered, cross-sectional study, we investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19 using a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in in iduals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0–100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+ n = 4148) or negative (C19− n = 546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified univariate and multivariate predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Both C19+ and C19− groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean ± SD, C19+: −82.5 ± 27.2 points C19−: −59.8 ± 37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both univariate and multivariate models (ROC AUC = 0.72). Additional variables provide negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms (e.g., fever). Olfactory recovery within 40 days of respiratory symptom onset was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since respiratory symptom onset. We find that quantified smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19 amongst those with symptoms of respiratory illness. To aid clinicians and contact tracers in identifying in iduals with a high likelihood of having COVID-19, we propose a novel 0–10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss, the ODoR-19. We find that numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4 & OR & 10). Once independently validated, this tool could be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.
Publisher: MDPI AG
Date: 06-03-2021
DOI: 10.3390/NU13030866
Abstract: The consumption of phenol-rich foods is limited by their prominent bitterness and astringency. This issue has been addressed by adding sweet tastes, which suppress bitterness, but this is not a complete solution since in iduals also differ in their preference for sweetness. In this study, we aimed at identifying groups of consumers differing in sweetness optima and sensory-liking patterns. To this end, increasing concentrations of sucrose were added to a chocolate pudding base. This allowed us to (1) investigate if in idual differences in sensory responses are associated with different sweet liking optima in a product context, (2) define the psychological and oro-sensory profile of sweet liker phenotypes derived using a product context, and (3) assess if in iduals differing in sweet liking optima differ also in consumption and liking of phenol-rich foods and beverages as a function of their sensory properties (e.g., sweeter vs. more bitter and astringent products). In iduals (1208 58.4% women, 18–69 years) were characterised for demographics, responsiveness to 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP), personality traits and attitudes toward foods. Three clusters were identified based on correlations between sensory responses (sweetness, bitterness and astringency) and liking of the s les: liking was positively related to sweetness and negatively to bitterness and astringency in High and Moderate Sweet Likers, and the opposite in Inverted U-Shaped. Differences between clusters were found in age, gender and personality. Furthermore, the Inverted-U Shaped cluster was found to have overall healthier food behaviours and preferences, with higher liking and consumption of phenol-rich vegetables and beverages without added sugar. These findings point out the importance of identifying the in idual sensory-liking patterns in order to develop more effective strategies to promote the acceptability of healthy phenol-rich foods.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 10-2017
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 09-2019
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 02-2023
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 06-2018
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 09-2018
Publisher: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Date: 26-07-2020
DOI: 10.1101/2020.07.22.20157263
Abstract: COVID-19 has heterogeneous manifestations, though one of the most common symptoms is a sudden loss of smell (anosmia or hyposmia). We investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19. This preregistered, cross-sectional study used a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in in iduals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0-100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+ n=4148) or negative (C19- n=546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified singular and cumulative predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Both C19+ and C19-groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean±SD, C19+: -82.5±27.2 points C19-: -59.8±37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both single and cumulative feature models (ROC AUC=0.72), with additional features providing negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms, such as fever or cough. Olfactory recovery within 40 days was reported for ∼50% of participants and was best predicted by time since illness onset. As smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19, we developed the ODoR-19 tool, a 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss. Numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4 OR ), which can be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2023
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 06-2015
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 11-2023
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 07-2020
No related grants have been discovered for Sara Spinelli.