Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32110771›Full record

ArticleCurrent developments in nutrition2020

Ultra-Processing or Oral Processing? A Role for Energy Density and Eating Rate in Moderating Energy Intake from Processed Foods.

Ciarán G Forde, Monica Mars, Kees de Graaf

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current developments in nutrition, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

84 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Ultra-Processed Food Intake and its Association With Eating Disorders: A Scoping Review.European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

24 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.

Ciarán G FordeClinical Nutrition Research Center, ASTAR Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-4001-9182
Monica MarsDivision of Human Nutrition and Health, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2010-1039
Kees de GraafDivision of Human Nutrition and Health, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5748-6916

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent observational data and a controlled in-patient crossover feeding trial show that consumption of "ultra-processed foods" (UPFs), as defined by the NOVA classification system, is associated with higher energy intake, adiposity, and at a population level, higher prevalence of obesity. A drawback of the NOVA classification is the lack of evidence supporting a causal mechanism for why UPFs lead to overconsumption of energy. In a recent study by Hall the energy intake rate in the UPF condition (48 kcal/min) was >50% higher than in the unprocessed condition (31 kcal/min). Extensive empirical evidence has shown the impact that higher energy density has on increasing ad libitum energy intake and body weight. A significant body of research has shown that consuming foods at higher eating rates is related to higher energy intake and a higher prevalence of obesity. Energy density can be combined with eating rate to create a measure of energy intake rate (kcal/min), providing an index of a food's potential to promote increased energy intake.

objectiveThe current paper compared the association between measured energy intake rate and level of processing as defined by the NOVA classification.

methodsData were pooled from 5 published studies that measured energy intake rates across a total sample of 327 foods.

resultsWe show that going from unprocessed, to processed, to UPFs that the average energy intake rate increases from 35.5 ± 4.4, to 53.7 ± 4.3, to 69.4 ± 3.1 kcal/min (

conclusionsWe conclude that reported relations between UPF consumption and obesity should account for differences in energy intake rates when comparing unprocessed and ultra-processed diets. Future research requires well-controlled human feeding trials to establish the causal mechanisms for why certain UPFs can promote higher energy intake.

Indexed as

eating rateenergy densityenergy intake ratefood texturemetabolic diseaseobesityultra-processed foodsunprocessed foods

Identifiers

PMID32110771
PMCPMC7042610

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.