Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34071760›Full record

ReviewNutrients2021

Fruit Juices: Are They Helpful or Harmful? An Evidence Review.

Carrie H S Ruxton, Madeleine Myers

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nutrients, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Effects ofPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

2 authors.

Carrie H S RuxtonNutrition Communications, East Road, Cupar KY15 4HQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0132-6331
Madeleine MyersNon-Diet Nutrition, Shirenewton NP16 6RL, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dietary guidelines often deal with 100% fruit juice (FJ) inconsistently because it represents a source of free sugars. However, FJ also provides bioavailable micronutrients and plant bioactives at levels similar to those found in whole fruits. The present review weighs up the evidence from high-quality studies investigating a potential health harm for FJ against evidence from studies which indicate a potential health benefit. The findings reveal that FJ consumption, at moderate intakes consistent with the dietary guidelines for the US and some European countries (75-224 mL daily), does not increase the risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease or poor glycaemic control. In contrast, regular consumption of FJ-even up to 500 mL per day in short-to-medium-term studies-appears to confer a health benefit in terms of vascular function and reduced blood pressure. Emerging evidence for cognitive health benefits requires further investigation in human trials. Observational studies report associations between FJ and nutrient adequacy and suggest that FJ consumption is associated with reduced risk of stroke. In conclusion, FJ appears to offer more benefit than risk and there appears to be no justification for discouraging FJ within a balanced diet for children and adults.

Indexed as

DietFruit and Vegetable JuicesNutritive ValueAdultCardiovascular DiseasesChildDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2HumansObesityPolyphenolsPotassiumPolyphenolsPotassiumcardiovascularcognitive functionfruit juicenutrient densityobesitypolyphenolspotassiumtype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID34071760
PMCPMC8228760
OpenAlexW3163951566

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.