ArticleScientific reports2025
Ultra-processed foods and plant-based alternatives impair nutritional quality of omnivorous and plant-forward dietary patterns in college students.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ultra-processed food intake and its nutritional consequences among youth when consuming vegan, lacto-ovo-vegetarian, pescatarian or omnivore diets: a cross-sectional study.Nutrition journal · 2026Article
- Rethinking Sustainability in Plant-Based Proteins: A Systems Perspective from Crop to Consumer.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Carbon tunnel vision and sustainable meat production in the West: A disproportionate focus on dietary greenhouse gas emissions?Food science of animal resources · 2026Review
- Development and application of a healthy plant content estimation algorithm for Australian packaged foods.Nutrition journal · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The health benefits of a plant-based diet may be outweighed by an increased consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPF) and plant-based alternatives. This study compares diet quality (intakes of protein, saturated fatty acids, sugar, fiber, and micronutrients) and nutritional status (prevalence of low holotranscobalamin and ferritin levels) among different dietary patterns: 22.5% vegans, 46.5% vegetarians, 31% omnivores in 142 first-year college students (20 ± 1.6 years, BMI 21.9 ± 3.1 kg/m², 83% female). Intakes of vitamin B12, folate, iron, zinc, and calcium were on average below reference values, especially in vegans and vegetarians. However, the prevalence of low holotranscobalamin and ferritin levels did not differ between the dietary groups, presumably due to supplementation. Irrespective of the diet, UPF contributed to 49% of daily energy intake. UPF exhibited a lower content of protein, fiber, vitamin B2, vitamin B12, folate, zinc and calcium compared to processed foods (all p < 0.001). Plant-based alternatives contained more fiber and less saturated fatty acids whereas the content of protein and micronutrients was lower compared with animal products (all p < 0.05). In conclusion, UPF consumption contributes to the inadequate intake of many micronutrients by young adults. This is further aggravated by plant-forward eating patterns including the consumption of plant-based alternatives.
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.