MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313856183 · doi:10.1093/nutrit/nuac107

Association between non-nutritive sweetener consumption and liver enzyme levels in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

2023· review· en· W4313856183 on OpenAlexaff
S. Amirhossein Golzan, Mina Movahedian, Neda Haghighat, Omid Asbaghi, Azita Hekmatdoost

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition Reviews · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicBiochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisMedicineInternal medicineContext (archaeology)Randomized controlled trialFatty liverConfidence intervalNonalcoholic fatty liver diseaseGastroenterologyDiseaseBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: The use of non-nutritive sweeteners (NNSs) is dramatically increasing in food commodities, and their effects on biochemical parameters have been the subject of great controversy. Liver enzymes as markers of liver injury may be helpful measures of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), but the outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) suggest their associations with NNSs are contentious. OBJECTIVE: The current study was designed to provide a GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs studying the consequences of NNS consumption on ALT, AST, and GGT concentrations (ie, the 3 main liver enzymes in adults). DATA SOURCES: Scopus, PubMed, and EMBASE were searched for relevant studies up to April 2021, with no time and language limitations. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent researchers extracted information from qualified studies, and a third researcher rechecked it. DATA ANALYSIS: Of 3212 studies, 10 studies that enrolled a total of 854 volunteers were included. A random-effects or fixed-effects model was utilized to calculate weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity between studies was evaluated using Cochran's Q test and quantified using the I2 statistic. The pooled results demonstrated that, compared with control groups, NNS intake led to nonsignificant reductions in ALT (WMD: -.78, 95% CI: -2.14, .57, P = .25) and GGT (WMD: -.21, 95% CI: -1.46, 1.04, P = .74). Also, a small nonsignificant increasing effect on AST level was found (WMD: .02, 95% CI: -1.26, 1.30, P = .97). NNS significantly reduced AST levels in type 2 diabetes patients when subgroup analyses were performed. Also, in trials with ≥24-week intervention or studies that utilized stevioside for intervention, a significant reducing effect on ALT level was observed. CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed that NNS intake has no significant effect on liver enzyme levels in adults. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration no. CRD42021250067.

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)0.062
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0620.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0550.011
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.388
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.097 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrition ReviewsSame topicBiochemical Analysis and Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207