ArticleAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2020
Perspective: Standards for Research and Reporting on Low-Energy ("Artificial") Sweeteners.
Article in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparative effects of different beverages on weight loss in adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2025Pooled it
- Relation of Change or Substitution of Low- and No-Calorie Sweetened Beverages With Cardiometabolic Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies.Diabetes care · 2022Pooled it
- Association of Low- and No-Calorie Sweetened Beverages as a Replacement for Sugar-Sweetened Beverages With Body Weight and Cardiometabolic Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2022Pooled it
- Effects of Unsweetened Preloads and Preloads Sweetened with Caloric or Low-/No-Calorie Sweeteners on Subsequent Energy Intakes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Controlled Human Intervention Studies.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2021Pooled it
- The effects of low-calorie sweeteners on energy intake and body weight: a systematic review and meta-analyses of sustained intervention studies.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2021Pooled it
- Effect of sweeteners and sweetness enhancers on weight management and gut microbiota composition in individuals with overweight or obesity: the SWEET study.Nature metabolism · 2025Trial
- Non-nutritive sweetened beverages versus water after a 52-week weight management programme: a randomised controlled trial.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Effects of Non-Nutritive Artificial Sweeteners on Gut Microbiota and Host Metabolism and Health-Related Outcomes: A Review.Nutrients · 2026Review
- Review
- An integrative analysis reveals cancer risk associated with artificial sweeteners.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- WHO guideline on the use of non-sugar sweeteners: a need for reconsideration.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2023Review
- Long-term aspartame and saccharin intakes are related to greater volumes of visceral, intermuscular, and subcutaneous adipose tissue: the CARDIA study.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2023Article
- Article
- Consumer Motives for Choosing Fruit and Cereal Bars-Differences Due to Consumer Lifestyles, Attitudes toward the Product, and Expectations.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Is There an Academic Bias against Low-Energy Sweeteners?Nutrients · 2022Article
- Low-calorie sweeteners in the human diet: scientific evidence, recommendations, challenges and future needs. A symposium report from the FENS 2019 conference.Journal of nutritional science · 2021Review
- Low-energy sweeteners and body weight: a citation network analysis.BMJ nutrition, prevention & health · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Widely differing views exist among experts, policy makers, and the general public with regard to the potential risks and benefits of reduced- or low-energy sweeteners (LES) in the diet. These views are informed and influenced by different types of research in LES, with differing hypotheses, designs, interpretation, and communication. Given the high level of interest in LES, and the public health relevance of the research evidence base, it is important that all aspects of the research process are framed and reported in an appropriate and balanced manner. In this Perspective, we identify and give examples of a number of issues relating to research and reviews on LES, which may contribute toward apparent inconsistencies in the content and understanding of the totality of evidence. We conclude with a set of recommendations for authors, reviewers and journal editors, as general guidance to improve and better standardize the quality of LES research design, interpretation, and reporting. These focus on clarity of underlying hypotheses, characterization of exposures, and the placement and weighting of new research within the wider context of related prior work.
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.