ArticleThe British journal of nutrition2025
High consumption of ultra-processed food and risk of colorectal cancer: the Norwegian Women and Cancer cohort study.
Article in The British journal of nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ultra-processed food intake and risk of digestive system cancers: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Ultra-processed Foods and Gastrointestinal Cancer: Epidemiologic Evidence, Mechanistic Pathways, and Clinical Implications.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Review
- Ultra-Processed Food Consumption and Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Current Evidence and Clinical Implications.Nutrients · 2025Review
- Body Composition and Survival in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Radiochemotherapy.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Colorectal cancer statistics, 2026.CA: a cancer journal for cliniciansObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Norway exhibits one of the highest rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the world, and several dietary factors have been associated with the risk of CRC. With higher consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPF), a better understanding of how food processing affects CRC might be a new approach for prevention. The current findings are contradictory, and new findings indicate that CRC risk factors might affect colorectal subsites differently. We wanted to study the association between intake of UPF and CRC risk in Norwegian women. In this prospective cohort analysis encompassing 77 100 women (1625 cases) from the Norwegian Women and Cancer study, dietary intakes were collected using validated semi-quantitative FFQ and categorised using the Nova classification system. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the association between intake of UPF and CRC risk. The average follow-up time was 17·4 years. A high UPF intake (fourth quartile), compared with a low UPF intake (first quartile), was statistically significantly associated with increased total CRC risk after adjusting for all covariates and energy intake (hazard ratio (HR) = 1·24; 95 % CI 1·04, 1·49,
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.