ReviewAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2014
Clinical research strategies for fructose metabolism.
Review in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acute and residual effects of aerobic exercise on fructose-induced postprandial lipemia on lean male subjects.European journal of nutrition · 2019Trial
- Trial
- Maternal fructose boosts the effects of a Western-type diet increasing SARS-COV-2 cell entry factors in male offspring.Journal of functional foods · 2023Article
- Fructose decreases physical activity and increases body fat without affecting hippocampal neurogenesis and learning relative to an isocaloric glucose diet.Scientific reports · 2015Article
- The role of dietary sugars and de novo lipogenesis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.Nutrients · 2014Review
- Carbohydrates.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fructose and simple sugars are a substantial part of the western diet, and their influence on human health remains controversial. Clinical studies in fructose nutrition have proven very difficult to conduct and interpret. NIH and USDA sponsored a workshop on 13-14 November 2012, "Research Strategies for Fructose Metabolism," to identify important scientific questions and parameters to be considered while designing clinical studies. Research is needed to ascertain whether there is an obesogenic role for fructose-containing sugars via effects on eating behavior and energy balance and whether there is a dose threshold beyond which these sugars promote progression toward diabetes and liver and cardiovascular disease, especially in susceptible populations. Studies tend to fall into 2 categories, and design criteria for each are described. Mechanistic studies are meant to validate observations made in animals or to elucidate the pathways of fructose metabolism in humans. These highly controlled studies often compare the pure monosaccharides glucose and fructose. Other studies are focused on clinically significant disease outcomes or health behaviors attributable to amounts of fructose-containing sugars typically found in the American diet. These are designed to test hypotheses generated from short-term mechanistic or epidemiologic studies and provide data for health policy. Discussion brought out the opinion that, although many mechanistic questions concerning the metabolism of monosaccharide sugars in humans remain to be addressed experimentally in small highly controlled studies, health outcomes research meant to inform health policy should use large, long-term studies using combinations of sugars found in the typical American diet rather than pure fructose or glucose.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.