Aspartame Consumption and Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Aspartame, a widely used artificial sweetener, has been under scrutiny for its potential carcinogenic effects. Although early studies raised concerns about its link to cancer, particularly in animal models, more recent human studies have produced mixed results. This protocol aims to systematically review the association between aspartame consumption and cancer risk. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted by searching databases including MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science. Eligible studies will involve human participants exposed to aspartame and assess cancer incidence as the primary outcome. Data extraction will include study characteristics, exposure levels, and cancer outcomes. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and data will be synthesized through qualitative and quantitative methods, including meta-analysis where applicable. Results: This review will present pooled risk estimates for cancer associated with aspartame consumption and explore variations by cancer type, dose, and duration of exposure. Conclusion: This study will provide an updated synthesis of evidence regarding aspartame consumption and its potential role in cancer development, informing future public health guidelines.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".