ReviewNutrients2024
Metabolic Effects of Selected Conventional and Alternative Sweeteners: A Narrative Review.
Review in Nutrients, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Oral Xylitol, Sucrose, and Acesulfame Potassium on Total Energy Intake During a SubsequentNutrients · 2025Trial
- KetoFLEX 12/3 Diet and Cognitive Health: A Precision-Nutrition Perspective on Mechanisms, Emerging Evidence, and Future Directions.Nutrients · 2026Review
- High-salt and high-sucrose diets may not reliably induce hypertension or diabetes in rat models.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Structural Elucidation of Quinovose-Containing Steviol Glycosides from Enzymatic Biotransformation ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Predictors of Fasting Endogenous Erythritol and Erythronate Concentrations in Humans: Cross-Sectional and Post-Bariatric Surgery Analyses.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Could Insulin Be a Better Regulator of Appetite/Satiety Balance and Body Weight Maintenance in Response to Glucose Exposure Compared to Sucrose Substitutes? Unraveling Current Knowledge and Searching for More Appropriate Choices.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sugar consumption is known to be associated with a whole range of adverse health effects, including overweight status and type II diabetes mellitus. In 2015, the World Health Organization issued a guideline recommending the reduction of sugar intake. In this context, alternative sweeteners have gained interest as sugar substitutes to achieve this goal without loss of the sweet taste. This review aims to provide an overview of the scientific literature and establish a reference tool for selected conventional sweeteners (sucrose, glucose, and fructose) and alternative sweeteners (sucralose, xylitol, erythritol, and D-allulose), specifically focusing on their important metabolic effects. The results show that alternative sweeteners constitute a diverse group, and each substance exhibits one or more metabolic effects. Therefore, no sweetener can be considered to be inert. Additionally, xylitol, erythritol, and D-allulose seem promising as alternative sweeteners due to favorable metabolic outcomes. These alternative sweeteners replicate the benefits of sugars (e.g., sweetness and gastrointestinal hormone release) while circumventing the detrimental effects of these substances on human health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.