MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404137179 · doi:10.52570/nesr.dgac2025.sr05

100% Juice and Growth, Body Composition, and Risk of Obesity: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

2024· review· en· W4404137179 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesNational Institutes of HealthSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungFood and Nutrition ServiceU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsMeta-analysisComposition (language)ObesityFood scienceMedicineChemistryInternal medicineArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What is the question?The question is: What is the relationship between 100% juice consumption and growth, body composition, and risk of obesity?The populations of interest for this question include infants and young children up to age 24 months, children, adolescents, adults, older adults, and individuals during pregnancy and postpartum. Why was this question asked?This systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted by the 2025 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee as part of the process to develop the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2025-2030. How was this question answered?The Committee conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis to answer this question with support from the USDA Nutrition Evidence Systematic Review team.This review updated an existing review that was conducted by the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee.What is the answer to the question?• A conclusion statement cannot be drawn about the relationship between 100% juice consumption by infants and young children, up to age 24 months, and outcomes related to growth patterns, body composition, and risk of obesity during childhood because of substantial concerns with consistency and precision in the body of evidence.• 100% juice consumption by children and adolescents is not associated with growth, body composition and risk of obesity.This conclusion statement is based on evidence graded as moderate.• 100% juice consumption by adults and older adults is not associated with body composition.This conclusion statement is based on evidence graded as moderate.• 100% juice consumption by adults and older adults may not be associated with weight gain.This conclusion statement is based on evidence graded as limited.• A conclusion statement cannot be drawn about the relationship between 100% juice consumption during pregnancy and adequacy of gestational weight gain because there is not enough evidence available.• A conclusion statement cannot be drawn about the relationship between 100% juice consumption during postpartum and postpartum weight change because there is not enough evidence available. How up-to-date is this systematic review?Conclusion statements from this review are based on articles published between January 2000 and May 2023.100% juice and growth, body composition, and risk of obesity: A systematic review with meta-analysis nesr.usda.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.063
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.063
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.032
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.286 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDiet and metabolism studies→French-language works237,207→