SynthesisBMC public health2025
Impact of ultra-processed foods consumption on the burden of obesity and type 2 diabetes in Belgium: a comparative risk assessment.
Synthesis in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Ultra-Processed Foods and Cardiometabolic Health: A Review of Current Evidence.Current nutrition reports · 2025Review
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
backgroundA high consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) has been related to several chronic diseases such as obesity and type 2 diabetes. This study aimed to estimate the proportion of the burden of obesity and type 2 diabetes in Belgium that could be attributed to the consumption of UPFs.
methodsA comparative-risk assessment framework was used. A literature search and a dose-response meta-analysis between UPFs intake and obesity and type 2 diabetes were performed. The risks were extracted from the curve dose-response meta-analysis and extrapolated to the mean of UPFs consumption by strata (5-year age category/sex/region) using the 2014/2015 Belgian Food Consumption Survey. The population attributable fraction and the attributable burden were then calculated for the prevalence of obesity and type 2 diabetes, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for type 2 diabetes.
resultsFrom the meta-analysis, for every 10% increase in UPFs intake (g/day), there was a 13% increase in risk of developing type 2 diabetes (RR:1.13, 95%IC 1.12-1.15, p<0.001) and for every 10% increase of energy intake from UPFs (kcal/day), there was a 5% increase in risk of developing obesity (RR:1.05, 95%IC 0.99-1.13, p=0.1321). Using these estimates, 21% of cases (277 056/1 286 454) of obesity in Belgium in 2014/2015 could be attributed to the UPFs intake. Similarly, for type 2 diabetes in Belgium in 2014/2015, 23% of cases (53 348/227 502) and 24% of DALYs (7 998/34 034) were attributed to UPFs consumption.
conclusionsThe sizeable impact of UPFs on the burden of obesity and type 2 diabetes in Belgium emphasizes the need to design and implement policies to address UPF consumption in Belgium.
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.