Ultra-Processed Foods and Human Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies
Vitale M, Costabile G, Testa R, D'Abbronzo G, Nettore IC, Macchia PE, Giacco R
Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 101 citations
How it was studied
- Design
- Meta-analysis (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Clinical events such as disease or death
- Intake measured by
- Not stated
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
- Government
- Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca
- Government
- Ministero dell'Istruzione e del Merito
- Government
- Ministero dell'Istruzione dell'Universita e della Ricerca
- Grants
- Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca (ALIFUN ARS01_00783)
Based on 3 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2023-12-18 · Adv Nutr · vol. 15 · issue 1 · p. 100121
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Cited
- 131 citations · more than 99% of similar papers · 8.3× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 52 works
- Access
- Open access (hybrid journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling · Nutritional Studies and Diet · Nutrition, Genetics, and Disease
- Keywords
- Medicine, Meta-analysis, Dyslipidemia, Prospective cohort study, Environmental health, Confidence interval, MEDLINE, Relative risk, Obesity, Cohort study, Diabetes mellitus, Systematic review, Internal medicine, Endocrinology
- MeSH
- humans, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, obesity, diet, prospective studies, dyslipidemias, food, processed
7 authors
From IT
- Marilena Vitale · correspondingFederico II University Hospital
- Giuseppina Costabile
- Roberta Testa
- Giovanna D’Abbronzo
- Immacolata Cristina Nettore
- Paolo Emidio Macchia
Abstract
Evidence of associations between ultra-processed foods (UPF) and increased risk of cardiovascular disease is emerging, but it is unclear how much this is influenced by the methodology used to assess the UPF intake or by the level of consumption. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate 1) the association between UPF consumption and risk of diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and obesity, using prospective cohort studies; 2) the differential associations depending on the methodology used to assess UPF intake and the level of UPF consumption and 3) the quality of evidence using the NutriGrade scoring system. A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, and Scopus through 1 April, 2023, on studies conducted in humans providing data for the highest compared with the lowest UPF consumption categories. Summary relative ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated using a random-effects model. Out of 4522 articles retrieved from the literature search, 25 reports met the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis, 7 for diabetes, 5 for hypertension, 3 for dyslipidemia, and 13 for obesity. A consistently positive association between high UPF intake and increased risk of developing diabetes (37%), hypertension (32%), hypertriglyceridemia (47%), low HDL cholesterol concentration (43%), and obesity (32%) was observed, even if the quality of evidence was not satisfying. However, these risks varied significantly depending on the methodology used to assess UPF consumption, with a difference of more than 50% between the methods. Based on the level of intake, we did not observe significant differences in the results. These findings show that UPF consumption is associated with higher risk of diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and obesity, but the level of risk consistently changes depending on the methodology used to assess UPF intake. Therefore, caution should be used when interpreting and extrapolating the results.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.