ArticleNutrition research reviews2020
Expert consensus on low-calorie sweeteners: facts, research gaps and suggested actions.
Article in Nutrition research reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effect of Non- and Low-Caloric Sweeteners on Substrate Oxidation, Energy Expenditure, and Catecholamines in Humans-A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 2023Pooled 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
- Trial
- Trial
- 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
- Trial
- Mutual Influence of Sucralose and Bisphenol A on Biological and Neurobehavioral Action inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Sweeteners in E-Cigarettes: A Minireview of Flavoring and Biological Action.Journal of xenobiotics · 2025Review
- Biological and Behavioral Responses ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Low- or No-Energy Sweeteners and Body Weight Management: Dissecting a "Minor" Effect.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025Review
- Should Atypical and Non-Representative Studies Such as NutriNet Santé Be Used to Drive Public Health Policy?Nutrients · 2025Article
- Review
- Advancements and Challenges in Sucralose Determination: A Comparative Review of Chromatographic, Electrochemical, and Spectrophotometric Methods.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Urinary excretion of low- and no-calorie sweeteners (LNCS) and associated food sources, as observed in the German cross-sectional KarMeN-study.European journal of nutrition · 2025Article
- Dietary Guidance, Sensory, Health and Safety Considerations When Choosing Low and No-Calorie Sweeteners.Nutrients · 2025Review
- Impact of Novel Foods on the Human Gut Microbiome: Current Status.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Substituting Low-Calorie Sweetened Beverages for Sugar-Sweetened Beverages to Prevent Obesity and Cardiometabolic Diseases: Still a Good Idea?Current developments in nutrition · 2024Article
- Expert consensus on nutrition and lower-carbohydrate diets: An evidence- and equity-based approach to dietary guidance.Frontiers in nutrition · 2024Review
- Approaches to Enhance Sugar Content in Foods: Is the Date Palm Fruit a Natural Alternative to Sweeteners?Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- International society of sports nutrition position stand: energy drinks and energy shots.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A consensus workshop on low-calorie sweeteners (LCS) was held in November 2018 where seventeen experts (the panel) discussed three themes identified as key to the science and policy of LCS: (1) weight management and glucose control; (2) consumption, safety and perception; (3) nutrition policy. The aims were to identify the reliable facts on LCS, suggest research gaps and propose future actions. The panel agreed that the safety of LCS is demonstrated by a substantial body of evidence reviewed by regulatory experts and current levels of consumption, even for high users, are within agreed safety margins. However, better risk communication is needed. More emphasis is required on the role of LCS in helping individuals reduce their sugar and energy intake, which is a public health priority. Based on reviews of clinical evidence to date, the panel concluded that LCS can be beneficial for weight management when they are used to replace sugar in products consumed in the diet (without energy substitution). The available evidence suggests no grounds for concerns about adverse effects of LCS on sweet preference, appetite or glucose control; indeed, LCS may improve diabetic control and dietary compliance. Regarding effects on the human gut microbiota, data are limited and do not provide adequate evidence that LCS affect gut health at doses relevant to human use. The panel identified research priorities, including collation of the totality of evidence on LCS and body weight control, monitoring and modelling of LCS intakes, impacts on sugar reduction and diet quality and developing effective communication strategies to foster informed choice. There is also a need to reconcile policy discrepancies between organisations and reduce regulatory hurdles that impede low-energy product development and reformulation.
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.