Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37881877›Full record

ArticlePublic health nutrition2023

Nutritional, environmental and economic impacts of ultra-processed food consumption in Australia.

Navoda Nirmani Liyanapathirana, Amanda Grech, Mengyu Li, Arunima Malik, Rosilene Ribeiro, Timur Burykin, Manfred Lenzen, David Raubenheimer

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Public health nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Goals in Nutrition Science 2025-2030.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026
    Review
  7. 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

8 authors.

Navoda Nirmani LiyanapathiranaISA, School of Physics A28, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW2006, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1283-1146
Amanda GrechThe School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Mengyu LiISA, School of Physics A28, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW2006, Australia.
Arunima MalikISA, School of Physics A28, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW2006, Australia.
Rosilene RibeiroThe School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Timur BurykinThe School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Manfred LenzenISA, School of Physics A28, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW2006, Australia.
David RaubenheimerThe School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo quantify the full life cycle impacts of ultra-processed foods (UPF) for key environmental, economic and nutritional indicators to identify trade-offs between UPF contribution to broad-scope sustainability.

designUsing 24-h dietary recalls along with an input-output database for the Australian economy, dietary environmental and economic impacts were quantified in this national representative cross-sectional analysis. Food items were classified into non-UPF and UPF using the NOVA system, and dietary energy contribution from non-UPF and UPF fractions in diets was estimated. Thereafter, associations between nutritional, environmental and economic impacts of non-UPF and UPF fractions of diets were examined using a multi-dimensional nutritional geometry representation.

settingNational Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey 2011-2012 of Australia.

participantsRespondents (n 5344) aged > 18 years with 1 d of 24-h dietary recall data excluding respondents with missing values and outlier data points and under reporters.

resultsAustralian diets rich in UPF were associated with reduced nutritional quality, high greenhouse gas emissions, energy use, and increased employment and income associated with the food supply chains. The environmental and economic impacts associated with the UPF portion of diets become more distinct when the diets are standardised to average protein recommendation.

conclusionIncreased consumption of UPF has socio-economic benefits, but this comes with adverse effects on the environment and public health. Consideration of such trade-offs is important in identifying policy and other mechanisms regarding UPF for establishing healthy and sustainable food systems.

Indexed as

Fast FoodsFood, ProcessedAustraliaCross-Sectional StudiesDietEnergy IntakeFood HandlingHumansNutrition SurveysInput–output analysisNutritional geometrySustainability indicatorsUltra-processed foods

Identifiers

PMID37881877
PMCPMC10755453

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.