Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35634416›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in nutrition2022

Impacts of Consumption of Ultra-Processed Foods on the Maternal-Child Health: A Systematic Review.

Priscila Gomes de Oliveira, Juliana Morais de Sousa, Débora Gabriela Fernandes Assunção, Elias Kelvin Severiano de Araujo, Danielle Soares Bezerra, Juliana Fernandes Dos Santos Dametto, Karla Danielly da Silva Ribeiro

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
12.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Associations between food deserts, food swamps, and ultra-processed food intake in childhood.Revista paulista de pediatria : orgao oficial da Sociedade de Pediatria de Sao Paulo · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Biocultural Determinants of Mothers' Complementary Feeding Decisions in the Urban Brazilian Amazon.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Priscila Gomes de OliveiraPost Graduate Program in Nutrition, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Juliana Morais de SousaPost Graduate Program in Nutrition, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Débora Gabriela Fernandes AssunçãoPost Graduate Program in Nutrition, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Elias Kelvin Severiano de AraujoNutrition Undergraduate Program, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Danielle Soares BezerraHealth Sciences College of Trairi, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Santa Cruz, Brazil.
Juliana Fernandes Dos Santos DamettoDepartment of Nutrition, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Karla Danielly da Silva RibeiroPost Graduate Program in Nutrition, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Aims: Changes in eating patterns have been leading to an increase in the consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPF), negatively impacting the quality of the diet and generating risk of harm to the health of the adult population, however, there is no systematized evidence of the impact of UPF in maternal-child health. Thus, in this study we aimed to evaluated the association between UPF consumption and health outcomes in the maternal-child population. Methods: Systematic review registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42021236633), conducted according to the PRISMA diagram in the following databases: PubMed, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Scielo, and CAPES thesis and dissertation directory. We included original cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies in any language. Eligibility criteria were (a) food consumption assessment by the NOVA classification, (b) health outcome (nutritional or diseases), and (c) maternal-child population (pregnant, lactating women and infants/children). All data were analyzed and extracted to a spreadsheet structured by two independent reviewers. We evaluated the methodological quality of the studies included using the Newcastle-Otawa Scale and RoB 2. Results: Searches retrieved 7,801 studies and 15 contemplated the eligibility criteria. Most studies included were cohort studies ( Conclusion: Despite the limited literature on UPF consumption and health outcomes in the maternal-child population, the highest UPF consumption negatively impacted nutrition and disease development indicators in pregnant, lactating women and children. Considering the expressive participation of these foods in the diet, other studies should be conducted to further investigate the impact of UPF consumption on different health indicators, especially in the lactation phase for this was the one to present the most important knowledge gap. Systematic Review Registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021236633], identifier [CRD42021236633].

Indexed as

childdiet qualityinfantlactationNOVA classificationoverweight/obesepregnancyultra-processed food consumption

Identifiers

PMID35634416
PMCPMC9136982
OpenAlexW4280594477

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.