A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials examining the effect of ultra-processed food on energy intake and weight gain
Robinson, E.; Jones, A.; Evans, R.; Finlay, A.; Brealey, J.; Gough, T.; Cummings, J.; Fisher, E.; Jutla, M.; Morenikeji-Ibilola, E.; Norton, V.
Show abstract
Ultra-processed food (UPF) may contribute to increased energy intake and weight gain, but evidence synthesis from randomised controlled trials (RCT) is lacking. A pre-registered systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs was conducted comparing UPF with less processed food (LPF) on energy intake and/or body weight in humans. Secondary analyses (meta-regression and sub-group) examined effects of UPF on appetite sensations, eating rate, palatability and considered the role of nutrient profile in explaining results. Ten eligible studies were included. UPF trial arms tended to have higher energy intake (standardised mean differences [SMDs]=0.18-0.44), but statistical significance varied between analytic models. Weight gain (SMD=0.65) and eating rate (SMD=0.96) were significantly greater in UPF trial arms. No significant differences in palatability, appetite sensations or energy intake later in the day were observed. Diets (UPF vs. LPF) used in trials were not matched for nutrient profile. Effects on energy intake varied if UPFs were higher (SMD=0.71) or similar (SMD=0.02) in energy density. Current RCTs are suggestive that UPFs may increase energy intake and body weight; however, results may be explained by energy density of foods used. Further research is needed to understand whether the level of processing impacts health outcomes independent to nutrient profile.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Calorie reformulation: A systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effect of manipulating food energy density on daily energy intake and body weight 97%
- Exploring the changing association between parental and adolescent fruit and vegetable intakes, from age 10 to 30 years 92%
- The impact of deprivation and neighbourhood food environments on home food environments, parental feeding practices, and child eating behaviours, food preferences and BMI: The Family Food Experience Study-London 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- The intergenerational effects of parental physical activity on offspring brain and neurocognition in humans: a scoping review 87%
- Problematic usage of the internet and eating disorders: a multifaceted, systematic review and meta-analysis 87%
- Common and distinct neural correlates of music and food-induced pleasure: a coordinate-based meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies. 86%
Similar papers in this journal
- The effect of calcium supplementation in people under 35 years old: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials 90%
- Serum metabolome indicators of early childhood development in the Brazilian National Survey on Child Nutrition (ENANI-2019) 89%
- Bias in nutrition-health associations is not eliminated by excluding extreme reporters in empirical or simulation studies 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evidence for a protein leverage effect on food intake but not on body mass index in a Norwegian population 94%
- Parental and individual socioeconomic position show distinct associations with trajectories of diet quality across adolescence and early adulthood 93%
- Effects of food-related odors on eating behavior: A systematic review 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Application of n-of-1 clinical trials in personalized nutrition research: a trial protocol for Westlake N-of-1 Trials for Macronutrient Intake (WE-MACNUTR) 93%
- How do the indices based on the EAT-Lancet recommendations measure adherence to healthy and sustainable diets? A comparison of measurement performance in adults from a French national survey 91%
- Effects of Minimally Processed Red Meat Within a Plant-Forward Diet on Biomarkers of Physical and Cognitive Aging: A Randomized Controlled Crossover Feeding Trial 88%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.