MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605444366 · doi:10.1080/10408398.2017.1304358

Metabolic effects of aspartame in adulthood: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

2017· review· en· W2605444366 on OpenAlexaff
Natalia Cardoso Santos, Laíza Magalhães de Araújo, Graziela De Luca Canto, Eliete Neves Silva Guerra, Michella Soares Coêlho, Maria de Fátima Borin

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicBiochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAspartameMedicineConfidence intervalMeta-analysisInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialObesityBody mass indexEndocrinologyFood scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data about harms or benefits associated with the consumption of aspartame, a nonnutritive sweetener worldwide consumed, are still controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials aimed to assess the effect of aspartame consumption on metabolic parameters related to diabetes and obesity. The search was performed on Cochrane, LILACS, PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science databases, and on a gray literature using Open Grey, Google Scholar, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. Searches across all databases were conducted from the earliest available date up to April 13, 2016, without date and language restrictions. Pooled mean differences were calculated using a random or fixed-effects model for heterogeneous and homogenous studies, respectively. Twenty-nine articles were included in qualitative synthesis and twelve, presenting numeric results, were used in meta-analysis. Fasting blood glucose (mmol/L), insulin levels (μU/mL), total cholesterol (mmol/L), triglycerides concentrations (mmol/L), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (mmol/L), body weight (kg), and energy intake (MJ) were considered as the main outcomes in subjects that consumed aspartame, and results were presented as mean difference; % confidence interval, range. Aspartame consumption was not associated with alterations on blood glucose levels compared to control (-0.03 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.21 to 0.14) or to sucrose (0.31 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.05 to 0.67) and on insulin levels compared to control (0.13 μU/mL; 95% CI, -0.69 to 0.95) or to sucrose (2.54 μU/mL; 95% CI, -6.29 to 11.37). Total cholesterol was not affected by aspartame consumption compared to control (-0.02 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.31 to 0.27) or to sucrose (-0.24 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.89 to 0.42). Triglycerides concentrations were not affected by aspartame consumption compared to control (0.00 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.05) or to sucrose (0.00 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.09). High-density lipoprotein cholesterol serum levels were higher on aspartame compared to control (-0.03 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.06 to -0.01) and lower on aspartame compared to sucrose (0.05 mmol/L; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.09). Body weight did not change after aspartame consumption compared to control (5.00 kg; 95% CI, -1.56 to 11.56) or to sucrose (3.78 kg; 95% CI, -2.18 to 9.74). Energy intake was not altered by aspartame consumption compared to control (-0.49 MJ; 95% CI, -1.21 to 0.22) or to sucrose (-0.17 MJ; 95% CI, -2.03 to 1.69). Data concerning effects of aspartame on main metabolic variables associated to diabetes and obesity do not support a beneficial related to its consumption.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.084
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.249
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.689
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0840.249
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0460.006
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.352
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.183 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations41
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Reviews in Food Science and NutritionSame topicBiochemical Analysis and Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207