Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32153917›Full record

ArticleBMC nutrition2019

The impact of food reformulation on nutrient intakes and health, a systematic review of modelling studies.

Carlo Federici, Patrick Detzel, Francesco Petracca, Livia Dainelli, Giovanni Fattore

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nutrition, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Meeting the Healthy People 2030 Added Sugars Target.American journal of preventive medicine · 2023
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Reformulation of Processed Yogurt and Breakfast Cereals over Time: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Carlo Federici1CeRGAS (Centre for Research on Health and Social Care Management), SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0309-4669
Patrick Detzel2Nestlé Research Center, Nestec SA, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Francesco Petracca1CeRGAS (Centre for Research on Health and Social Care Management), SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy.
Livia Dainelli2Nestlé Research Center, Nestec SA, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Giovanni Fattore1CeRGAS (Centre for Research on Health and Social Care Management), SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnhealthy diet is a risk factor for adverse health outcomes. Reformulation of processed foods has the potential to improve population diet, but evidence of its impact is limited. The purpose of this review was to explore the impact of reformulation on nutrient intakes, health outcomes and quality of life; and to evaluate the quality of modelling studies on reformulation interventions.

methodsA systematic review of peer-reviewed articles published between January 2000 and December 2017 was performed using MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination of the University of York. Additional studies were identified through informal searches on Google and specialized websites. Only simulation studies modelling the impact of food reformulation on nutrient intakes and health outcomes were included. Included articles were independently extracted by 2 reviewers using a standardized, pre-piloted data form, including a self-developed tool to assess study quality.

resultsA total of 33 studies met the selected inclusion criteria, with 20, 5 and 3 studies addressing sodium, sugar and fats reformulation respectively, and 5 studies addressing multiple nutrients. Evidence on the positive effects of reformulation on consumption and health was stronger for sodium interventions, less conclusive for sugar and fats. Study features were highly heterogeneous including differences in methods, the type of policy implemented, the extent of the reformulation, and the spectrum of targeted foods and nutrients. Nonetheless, partial between-study comparisons show a consistent relationship between percentages reformulated and reductions in individual consumption. Positive results are also shown for health outcomes and quality of life measures, although comparisons across studies are limited by the heterogeneity in model features and reporting. Study quality was often compromised by short time-horizons, disregard of uncertainty and time dependencies, and lack of model validation.

conclusionsReformulation models highlight relevant improvements in diets and population health. While models are valuable tools to evaluate reformulation interventions, comparisons are limited by non-homogeneous designs and assumptions. The use of validated models and extensive scenario analyses would improve models' credibility, providing useful insights for policy-makers. REVIEW REGISTRATION: A research protocol was registered within the PROSPERO database (ID number CRD42017057341).

Indexed as

Decision-analytical modelsFat intakeFood reformulationModellingNutrition policiesPublic healthSodium intakeSugar intake

Identifiers

PMID32153917
PMCPMC7050744

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.