Digestery
Diet and food › Ultra-Processed Food › Studies

Systematic review

Review of 17 long-term studies in adults: ultra-processed food linked to later obesity

Mambrini and colleagues · Nutrients · 2023

Original title: Ultra-Processed Food Consumption and Incidence of Obesity and Cardiometabolic Risk Factors in Adults: A Systematic Review of Prospective Studies.

Under review. A person has not yet checked this summary against the paper. It is written from the PubMed abstract. Until a person checks it, search engines are asked not to list this page.

What the study found

Points to harm

Studies agreed that more ultra-processed food was linked to new general and belly obesity. Evidence on heart and metabolic risk was more limited, but most studies found higher risk of high blood pressure, diabetes and bad blood fats.

The study at a glance

Type of study
Systematic review
Who or what was studied
17 studies · Adults in 17 long-term studies
What was tested
Ultra-processed food intake and later obesity and heart and metabolic risk
What it measured
The question itself: death, heart disease, diabetes and cancer
Who has a stake
No stake declared
No competing interests declared.
Journal
Nutrients, 2023
Source
PubMed record 37299546. This page is based on the abstract only.

How much this study counts

  • •Sums up 17 studies found with a set search method, without pooling the numbers.
  • ✓Measured the question itself: death, heart disease, diabetes and cancer.
  • ✓No competing interests declared.
  • •Summarized from the PubMed abstract only. The full paper may hold details the abstract leaves out.

✓ Strength– Limit• Note

These points come from fixed rules about the type of study, its size and length, what it measured, and who has a stake. Every study on Digestery gets the same rules.

Where this study sits

This paper is not on the ladder. It is a systematic review, and reviews and opinion pieces discuss studies that are already counted on the steps below.

↑ Stronger evidence

  1. Trials in people: death and chronic disease

    2

    1 no difference, 1 harm

  2. Trials in people: other measures

    3

    1 mixed, 1 no direction, 1 harm

  3. Trials in people: lab tests or safety

    1

    1 mixed

  4. Population studies

    17

    1 mixed, 16 harm

  5. Blood levels and genes

    0

    None among the papers we read.

↓ Weaker evidence

  • Points to benefit
  • Mixed
  • No difference
  • No direction
  • Points to harm

How it fits with the other research

The short answer to “Are ultra-processed foods bad for your health?”

Linked to worse health; cause not proven.

Confidence: low. Based on 38 on-topic papers.

Read the full answer
  • Listed with the other papers, but not quoted in the page’s main findings.

Other reviews on this question

See all 38 studies on this question

How this page was made

Label

First read of the abstract
Claude Sonnet
Independent second read
Claude Haiku
Differences settled
The reviewer corrected 2 fields after reading the abstract. Claude Opus 5.5.
Headline
Claude Sonnet, from the checked study record. A script checked its numbers and wording.
Numbers
Checked against the abstract by a script
“How much this study counts”
Fixed rules, the same for every study
Source check by a person
Not yet. Required before search engines may list this page.

Spot an error? Email a flag with a link to your source, or use the form on the question page.