Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32271923›Full record

SynthesisThe Journal of nutrition2020

A Systematic Review and Activation Likelihood Estimation Meta-Analysis of fMRI Studies on Sweet Taste in Humans.

Carl A Roberts, Timo Giesbrecht, Nicholas Fallon, Anna Thomas, David J Mela, Tim C Kirkham

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Journal of nutrition, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05310162 (Effect of the Intervention "Food, Fun and Family" on Sleep Bruxism in Children), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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.

NCT05310162 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Effect of the Intervention "Food, Fun and Family" on Sleep Bruxism in Children

TypeinterventionalSponsorCES UniversityRan2022 to 2023Enrolled80ConditionsSleep Bruxism, ChildhoodArmsFood, fun and family, Counseling
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Expectation Modulates Hedonic Experiences and Midbrain Responses to Sweet Flavor.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. High-intensity sweet taste as a predictor of subjective alcohol responses to the ascending limb of an intravenous alcohol prime: an fMRI study.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Carl A RobertsDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Timo GiesbrechtUnilever R&D, Port Sunlight, United Kingdom.
Nicholas FallonDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Anna ThomasUnilever R&D, Port Sunlight, United Kingdom.
David J MelaUnilever R&D, Vlaardingen, Netherlands.
Tim C KirkhamDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
University of Liverpool · GBUnilever (United Kingdom) · GBUnilever (Netherlands) · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe reward value of palatable foods is often cited as an important influence on eating behaviors, including intake of sugars. However, human neuroimaging studies have generated conflicting evidence on the basic neural representation of taste and reward responses to caloric sweeteners (sucrose and glucose), and most relevant studies have used small subject numbers.

objectiveWe conducted a systematic review and a coordinate-based meta-analysis of studies reporting brain responses to oral sugar solutions.

methodsA systematic search of MEDLINE, Scopus, and PsycINFO through October 2019 identified fMRI studies (in healthy human adults, including those with overweight or obesity) assessing differences in responses to purified sweet and nonsweet taste stimuli. Data were extracted with the primary objective of quantifying evidence for the activation of brain regions associated with caloric sweet taste sensation. We used activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis methods. We also performed multiple sensitivity analyses to assess the generality of effects.

resultsOf 455 unique articles, 15 met the criteria for inclusion. These contributed to 2 primary meta-analyses: 1) sucrose (13 experiments, 179 coordinates, n = 241) and 2) sucrose + glucose (16 experiments, 209 coordinates, n = 262). Consistent activation was apparent in primary taste areas: insula (69.2% of studies) and opercular cortex (76.9% of studies), precentral gyri (53.9% of studies), and globus pallidus and postcentral gyrus (30.8% of studies for each). Evidence of reward activity (caudate) was seen in the primary analyses (30.8% of studies) but not in sensitivity analysis.

conclusionsWe confirm the importance of primary taste areas for gustatory processing in human adults. We also provide tentative evidence for reward-related caudate activity in relation to the sweet taste of caloric sugars. A number of factors affect the observation and interpretation of brain responses, including reward-related activity. Firm conclusions require confirmation with large data set studies.

Indexed as

Sweetening AgentsTasteHumansLikelihood FunctionsMagnetic Resonance ImagingSucroseSucroseSweetening AgentsfMRImeta-analysisrewardsugarssweet taste

Identifiers

PMID32271923
PMCPMC7269728
OpenAlexW3015775884

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.