Important food sources of fructose-containing sugars and adiposity: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled feeding trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) providing excess energy increase adiposity. The effect of other food sources of sugars at different energy control levels is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of food sources of fructose-containing sugars by energy control on adiposity. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched through April 2022 for controlled trials ≥2 wk. We prespecified 4 trial designs by energy control: substitution (energy-matched replacement of sugars), addition (energy from sugars added), subtraction (energy from sugars subtracted), and ad libitum (energy from sugars freely replaced). Independent authors extracted data. The primary outcome was body weight. Secondary outcomes included other adiposity measures. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to assess the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: = 0.022) in subtraction trials with no effect in substitution or ad libitum trials. There was interaction/influence by food sources on body weight: substitution trials [fruits decreased; added nutritive sweeteners and mixed sources (with SSBs) increased]; addition trials [dried fruits, honey, fruits (≤10%E), and 100% fruit juice (≤10%E) decreased; SSBs, fruit drink, and mixed sources (with SSBs) increased]; subtraction trials [removal of mixed sources (with SSBs) decreased]; and ad libitum trials [mixed sources (with/without SSBs) increased]. GRADE scores were generally moderate. Results were similar across secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Energy control and food sources mediate the effect of fructose-containing sugars on adiposity. The evidence provides a good indication that excess energy from sugars (particularly SSBs at high doses ≥20%E or 100 g/d) increase adiposity, whereas their removal decrease adiposity. Most other food sources had no effect, with some showing decreases (particularly fruits at lower doses ≤10%E or 50 g/d). This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02558920 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02558920).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.031 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".