Ultra-Processed Food Intake Is Associated with Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is associated with overweight/obesity, metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes (T2D) due to chronic caloric excess and physical inactivity. Previous meta-analyses have confirmed associations between ultra-processed food (UPF) intake and obesity and T2D. We aim to ascertain the contribution of UPF consumption to the risk of developing NAFLD. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO (CRD42022368763)). All records registered on Ovid Medline and Web of Science were searched from inception until December 2022. Studies that assessed UPF consumption in adults, determined according to the NOVA food classification system, and that reported NAFLD determined by surrogate (steatosis) scores, imaging or liver biopsy were included. The association between UPF consumption and NAFLD was assessed using random-effects meta-analysis methods. Study quality was assessed, and evidence credibility evaluated, using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale and NutriGrade systems, respectively. A total of 5454 records were screened, and 112 records underwent full text review. From these, 9 studies (3 cross-sectional, 3 case-control and 3 cohort), analysing 60,961 individuals, were included in the current review. Both moderate (vs. low) (pooled relative risk 1.03 (1.00–1.07) (p = 0.04) (I2 = 0%)) and high (vs. low) (1.42 (1.16–1.75) (<0.01) (I2 = 89%)) intake of UPF significantly increased the risk of NAFLD. Funnel plots demonstrate low risk of publication bias. Consumption of UPF is associated with NAFLD with a dose–response effect. Public health measures to reduce overconsumption of UPF are imperative to reduce the burden of NAFLD, and the related conditions, obesity and T2D.
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 | 0.010 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.030 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".