Important Food Sources of Fructose‐Containing Sugars and Incident Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Dose‐Response Meta‐Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Sugar‐sweetened beverages are associated with hypertension. We assessed the relation of important food sources of fructose‐containing sugars with incident hypertension using a systematic review and meta‐analysis of prospective cohort studies. Methods and Results We searched MEDLINE , EMBASE, and Cochrane (through December week 2, 2018) for eligible studies. For each food source, natural log‐transformed risk ratios (RRs) for incident hypertension were pooled using pair‐wise meta‐analysis and linear and nonlinear dose‐response meta‐analyses. Certainty in our evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. We identified 26 reports, including 15 prospective cohorts (930 677 participants; 363 459 cases). Sugar‐sweetened beverages showed harmful ( RR per‐355‐mL , 1.10 [95% CI , 1.08, 1.12]) whereas fruit ( RR per‐240‐g , 0.94 [95% CI , 0.96, 0.99]) and yogurt showed protective associations ( RR per‐125‐g , 0.95 [95% CI , 0.94, 0.97]) with incident hypertension throughout the dose range. One hundred percent fruit juice showed a protective association only at moderate doses ( RR at‐100‐mL , 0.97 [95% CI , 0.94, 0.99]). The pair‐wise protective association of dairy desserts was not supported by linear dose‐response analysis. Fruit drinks or sweet snacks were not associated with hypertension. Certainty of the evidence was “low” for sugar‐sweetened beverages, 100% fruit juice, fruit, and yogurt and “very low” for fruit drinks, sweet snacks, and dairy desserts. Conclusions The harmful association between sugar‐sweetened beverages and hypertension does not extend to other important food sources of fructose‐containing sugars. Further research is needed to improve our estimates and better understand the dose‐response relationship between food sources of fructose‐containing sugars and hypertension. Registration URL : https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ . Unique identifier: NCT 02702375.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".