Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28886707›Full record

ArticleNutrition journal2017

Health outcomes of non-nutritive sweeteners: analysis of the research landscape.

Szimonetta Lohner, Ingrid Toews, Joerg J Meerpohl

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrition journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
10.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

76 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 186 citations in OpenAlex.

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

16 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Szimonetta LohnerCochrane Hungary, Medical Center, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
Ingrid ToewsCochrane Germany, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Breisacher Str. 153, Freiburg, 79110, Germany.
Joerg J MeerpohlCochrane Germany, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Breisacher Str. 153, Freiburg, 79110, Germany. meerpohl.jj@gmail.com.
University Medical Center Freiburg · DEUniversity of Freiburg · DEUniversity of Pecs · HU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFood products containing non-nutritive sweeteners (NNSs) instead of sugar have become increasingly popular in the last decades. Their appeal is obviously related to their calorie-free sweet taste. However, with the dramatic increase in their consumption, it is reasonable and timely to evaluate their potential health benefits and, more importantly, potential adverse effects. The main aim of this scoping review was to map the evidence about health outcomes possibly associated with regular NNS consumption by examining the extent, range, and nature of research activity in this area.

methodsWe systematically searched Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane CENTRAL databases for studies on NNSs (artificial sweeteners or natural, non-caloric sweeteners, either used individually or in combination) using text terms with appropriate truncation and relevant indexing terms. All human studies investigating any health outcomes of a NNS intervention or exposure were eligible for inclusion. No studies were excluded based on language, study design or methodological quality. Data for each health outcome were summarized in tabular form and were discussed narratively.

resultsFinally, we included 372 studies in our scoping review, comprising 15 systematic reviews, 155 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 23 non-randomized controlled trials, 57 cohort studies, 52 case-control studies, 28 cross sectional studies and 42 case series/case reports. In healthy subjects, appetite and short term food intake, risk of cancer, risk of diabetes, risk of dental caries, weight gain and risk of obesity are the most investigated health outcomes. Overall there is no conclusive evidence for beneficial and harmful effects on those outcomes. Numerous health outcomes including headaches, depression, behavioral and cognitive effects, neurological effects, risk of preterm delivery, cardiovascular effects or risk of chronic kidney disease were investigated in fewer studies and further research is needed. In subjects with diabetes and hypertension, the evidence regarding health outcomes of NNS use is also inconsistent.

conclusionsThis scoping review identifies the needs for future research to address the numerous evidence gaps related to health effects of NNSs use.It also specifies the research questions and areas where a systematic review with meta-analyses is required for the proper evaluation of health outcomes associated to regular NNSs consumption.

Indexed as

Health StatusNon-Nutritive SweetenersBiomedical ResearchBody WeightDental CariesDiabetes MellitusEatingHumansMEDLINENeoplasmsObesityRenal Insufficiency, ChronicRisk FactorsWeight GainNon-Nutritive SweetenersArtificial sweetenerAspartameCancerDental cariesDiabetesNon-nutritive sweetenerObesityOverweightSaccharinScoping reviewSteviaWeight gain

Identifiers

PMID28886707
PMCPMC5591507
OpenAlexW2752311095

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.