Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28703086›Full record

ArticlePublic health nutrition2018

Ultra-processed foods and the limits of product reformulation.

Gyorgy Scrinis, Carlos Augusto Monteiro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health nutrition, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 86 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
86citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

86 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

26 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Gyorgy Scrinis1Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences,University of Melbourne,Building 142,Parkville,Melbourne,VIC 3010,Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3897-4778
Carlos Augusto Monteiro2Department of Nutrition,School of Public Health,University of São Paulo,São Paulo,Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The nutritional reformulation of processed food and beverage products has been promoted as an important means of addressing the nutritional imbalances in contemporary dietary patterns. The focus of most reformulation policies is the reduction in quantities of nutrients-to-limit - Na, free sugars, SFA, trans-fatty acids and total energy. The present commentary examines the limitations of what we refer to as 'nutrients-to-limit reformulation' policies and practices, particularly when applied to ultra-processed foods and drink products. Beyond these nutrients-to-limit, there are a range of other potentially harmful processed and industrially produced ingredients used in the production of ultra-processed products that are not usually removed during reformulation. The sources of nutrients-to-limit in these products may be replaced with other highly processed ingredients and additives, rather than with whole or minimally processed foods. Reformulation policies may also legitimise current levels of consumption of ultra-processed products in high-income countries and increased levels of consumption in emerging markets in the global South.

Indexed as

DietFast FoodsNutritive ValueFood AnalysisFood HandlingHumansNutrition PolicyNutrition SurveysFood processingNutrition policyProduct reformulationUltra-processed foods

Identifiers

PMID28703086
PMCPMC10261094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.