ReviewObesity science & practice2019
From biology to behavior: a cross-disciplinary seminar series surrounding added sugar and low-calorie sweetener consumption.
Review in Obesity science & practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global trends in added sugars and non-nutritive sweetener use in the packaged food supply: drivers and implications for public health.Public health nutrition · 2023Article
- Sugars and Sweet Taste: Addictive or Rewarding?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- Does the Australian Health Star Rating System Encourage Added Sugar Reformulation? Trends in Sweetener Use in Australia.Nutrients · 2021Article
- Optimizing the formulation of the functional beverage from the co-crystalized powder ofJournal of food science and technology · 2020Article
- From biology to behavior: a cross-disciplinary seminar series surrounding added sugar and low-calorie sweetener consumption.Obesity science & practice · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis report presents a synopsis of a three-part, cross-sector, seminar series held at the George Washington University (GWU) in Washington, DC from February-April, 2018. The overarching goal of the seminar series was to provide a neutral forum for diverse stakeholders to discuss and critically evaluate approaches to address added sugar intake, with a key focus on the role of low-calorie sweeteners (LCS).
methodsDuring three seminars, twelve speakers from academic institutions, federal agencies, non-profit organizations, and the food and beverage industries participated in six interactive panel discussions to address: 1) Do Farm Bill Policies Impact Population Sugar Intake? 2) What is the Impact of Sugar-sweetened Beverage (SSB) Taxes on Health and Business? 3) Is Sugar Addictive? 4) Product Reformulation Efforts: Progress, Challenges, and Concerns? 5) Low-calorie Sweeteners: Helpful or Harmful, and 6) Are Novel Sweeteners a Plausible Solution? Discussion of each topic involved brief 15-minute presentations from the speakers, which were followed by a 25-minute panel discussion moderated by GWU faculty members and addressed questions generated by the audience. Sessions were designed to represent opposing views and stimulate meaningful debate. Given the provocative nature of the seminar series, attendee questions were gathered anonymously using Pigeonhole™, an interactive, online, question and answer platform.
resultsThis report summarizes each presentation and recapitulates key perspectives offered by the speakers and moderators.
conclusionsThe seminar series set the foundation for robust cross-sector dialogue necessary to inform meaningful future research, and ultimately, effective policies for lowering added sugar intakes.
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.