Ultra-processed foods and human health: An umbrella review and updated meta-analyses of observational evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Ultra-processed food (UPF) intake has increased sharply over the last few decades and has been consistently asserted to be implicated in the development of non-communicable diseases. We aimed to evaluate and update the existing observational evidence for associations between ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption and human health. METHODS: We searched Medline and Embase from inception to March 2023 to identify and update meta-analyses of observational studies examining the associations between UPF consumption, as defined by the NOVA classification, and a wide spectrum of health outcomes. For each health outcome, we estimated the summary effect size, 95% confidence interval (CI), between-study heterogeneity, evidence of small-study effects, and evidence of excess-significance bias. These metrics were used to evaluate evidence credibility of the identified associations. RESULTS: This umbrella review identified 39 meta-analyses on the associations between UPF consumption and health outcomes. We updated all meta-analyses by including 122 individual articles on 49 unique health outcomes. The majority of the included studies divided UPF consumption into quartiles, with the lowest quartile being the reference group. We identified 25 health outcomes associated with UPF consumption. For observational studies, 2 health outcomes, including renal function decline (OR: 1.25; 95% CI: 1.18, 1.33) and wheezing in children and adolescents (OR: 1.42; 95% CI: 1.34, 1.49), showed convincing evidence (Class I); and five outcomes were reported with highly suggestive evidence (Class II), including diabetes mellitus, overweight, obesity, depression, and common mental disorders. CONCLUSIONS: High UPF consumption is associated with an increased risk of a variety of chronic diseases and mental health disorders. At present, not a single study reported an association between UPF intake and a beneficial health outcome. These findings suggest that dietary patterns with low consumption of UPFs may render broad public health benefits.
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 | 0.046 | 0.133 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.027 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.020 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".