**Background:** Adolescence is a period of nutritional risk due to increased requirements for growth and erratic diets, with common deficiencies in calcium, iron, zinc, and several vitamins. Snacks can account for up to a third of daily energy intake, making them a target for nutritional improvement. Legume flours, particularly chickpea flour, are rich in protein, fibre, and micronutrients typically lacking in adolescent diets. This study applied Rational Food Design (RFD) principles, incorporating EFSA Dietary Reference Values (DRV) as formula design variables and acoustic-texture measurements as response variables, to develop nutrient-dense biscuits for adolescents aged 11–14.
**Methods:** Four biscuit formulations were prepared with chickpea flour (CF) to rice flour (RF) ratios of 100:0, 75:25, 50:50, and 25:75. Other ingredients (water 23.5%, sunflower oil 13.3%, orange blossom water 2.4%, sugar 7.2%, salt 0.3%) were kept constant. Nutritional composition was analysed per ISO standards, including proximate analysis, mineral composition (calcium, phosphorus, iron, magnesium, manganese, zinc, potassium, copper, selenium), and energy calculation using Atwater factors. Instrumental texture analysis simultaneously measured mechanical properties (maximum force, distance at break, number of force peaks, linear distance) and acoustic properties (maximum sound pressure level, number of sound peaks) using a Texture Analyser and calibrated microphone. A trained panel of 7 assessors performed quantitative descriptive analysis using 7 descriptors (hardness, grittiness, fragility, prickliness, chewiness, crispness, crunchiness). Consumer tasting involved 33 adolescents (11–12 years, 33% female, 67% male) who evaluated the G50:50 sample using a 9-point hedonic scale.
**Key Results:** Protein content ranged from 7.71 g/100g (G25:75) to 13.92 g/100g (G100:0). Fibre ranged from 2.59 g/100g to 7.07 g/100g. Mineral content increased approximately 2-fold when increasing the CF:RF ratio from 25:75 to 100:0. For example, iron ranged from 1.26 mg/100g to 3.39 mg/100g, zinc from 1.00 to 1.99 mg/100g, and magnesium from 54.12 to 113.45 mg/100g. Energy content did not differ significantly across samples (457.15–471.76 kcal/100g). Instrumental texture showed that G100:0 and G75:25 had significantly higher maximum force (18.13 N and 19.68 N) compared to G50:50 and G25:75 (11.68 N and 10.97 N). The 100% chickpea biscuit showed the highest crispness indicators (maximum SPL 75.74 dB, number of force peaks 9.8, linear distance 94.76 N*s). Sensory analysis revealed that hardness, grittiness, chewiness, and crunchiness increased with CF content. In consumer testing, 97% rated overall appearance positively (score ≥6), 91% for colour, 76% for aroma, 52% for texture, but only 45% for flavour. Overall liking was positive for 52% of participants. None of the adolescents identified the chickpea flavour; 55% could not identify any dominant flavour, 24% described it as 'biscuit flavour', and 12% perceived a 'nutty flavour'.
**Clinical Implications:** This study demonstrates that RFD incorporating EFSA DRV can produce biscuits with significantly improved nutritional profiles compared to commercial alternatives. Compared to the average of 49 commercial plain biscuits (70.3 g/100g carbohydrates, 21.6 g sugar, 16.0 g fat, 3.2 g fibre, 6.0 g protein, 0.9 g salt), all chickpea biscuit samples contained less carbohydrates, sugar, and salt, with higher protein and fibre content. A 30 g serving of the 100% chickpea biscuit provided 12.71% of the Average Requirement (AR) for iron, 13.61% for magnesium, 16.91% for copper, and 16.50% for manganese. None exceeded the Tolerable Upper Intake Level for any mineral. The study highlights the trade-off between nutritional density and sensory acceptability—higher chickpea content improves nutrition but increases hardness and reduces palatability for adolescents. The authors note limitations including the need to assess antinutritional factors and recommend future integration of imaging technologies, digestion studies, and physiological responses.