Systematic review2024Open access

Association between ultraprocessed foods consumption, eating disorders, food addiction and body image: a systematic review

Pereira T, Mocellin MC, Curioni C

BMJ open · 9 citations

How it was studied

Design
Systematic review (indexed by PubMed)
Studied in
People
Main outcome
Health markers and function
Intake measured by
Not stated

Who paid for it

Funding
Independent funding
Government
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
Grants
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior ((Code 001))

Based on 1 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.

Publication

Published
2024-12-01 · BMJ Open · vol. 14 · issue 12 · p. e091223
Publisher
BMJ
Cited
14 citations · more than 82% of similar papers · 1.7× the field average
References
60 works
Access
Open access (journal) · CC-BY-NC
Research areas
Eating Disorders and Behaviors · Culinary Culture and Tourism · Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Keywords
Medicine, PsycINFO, Systematic review, Food addiction, Eating disorders, MEDLINE, Scopus, Checklist, Critical appraisal, Data extraction, Binge eating, Cross-sectional study, Addiction, Environmental health, Psychiatry, Alternative medicine, Psychology, Pathology
MeSH
humans, cross-sectional studies, feeding behavior, body image, fast foods, feeding and eating disorders, food addiction

3 authors

From BR

  • T.D.S. Pereira · correspondingUniversidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro; Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
  • Michel Carlos MocellinUniversidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
  • Cíntia Chaves CurioniUniversidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed to assess the association between ultraprocessed foods (UPF) consumption, eating disorders (EDs), food addiction and body image concerns.

Design

Systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

Data sources

Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, LILACS and APA PsycInfo databases, for studies published between 2009 and July 2024.

Eligibility criteria

We included cross-sectional and cohort studies involving individuals of all ages, evaluating the association between UPF consumption, classified by the 'NOVA system', EDs, food addiction and body image. No restrictions were placed on diagnostic criteria, age and gender. Studies that modelled UPF consumption as both an exposure and an outcome were included.

Data extraction and synthesis

Data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist.

Results

We did not identify any longitudinal studies. Nine cross-sectional studies were included (n=54 367 participants). One study assessed EDs types, including restrictive, bulimic, binge eating and other (not otherwise specified); three studies examined body dissatisfaction, while five studies investigated food addiction. The consumption of UPF was significantly associated with bulimic, binge eating and other ED and food addiction. No significant associations were identified between restrictive ED and body dissatisfaction.

Conclusion

This systematic review highlights a significant gap in research on this topic. Although some associations have been found, the findings are limited to cross-sectional studies with methodological limitations. The lack of longitudinal studies emphasises the need for more rigorous research to accurately assess the direction of these relationships.

Prospero registration number

CRD42022365154.

Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY-NC).

Community trust

Loading…

How much do you trust this study's findings?

0 · not at all10 · completely

Comments

Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign in

Something 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 in

Educational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.