ReviewCureus2025
Navigating Evidence on Ultra-Processed Foods and Cancer: A Narrative Review.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A healthy human body is built on the foundation of proper nutrition. Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are made with ingredients that are uncommon in home kitchens, such as preservatives, flavorings, emulsifiers, and refined substances. Globally, the consumption of UPFs continues to rise, while the intake of nutrient-dense foods declines. At the same time, cancer incidence is also increasing, particularly among younger populations. Although the exact reasons for this trend remain unclear, numerous studies are underway to better understand the contributing factors. One area of growing interest is the potential link between UPF consumption and cancer risk. We reviewed observational studies, systematic reviews, and literature reviews published in PubMed, PMC, and ScienceDirect between 2010 and 2025 to evaluate evidence for the association between UPF and cancer risk. A total of 663 articles were initially identified across the databases using our defined keywords. After duplicate removal and successive screening of titles, abstracts, and study quality, 11 research papers were included in the final review. Growing evidence focuses on several possible ways UPFs may influence cancer risk, such as exposing the body to harmful additives, disrupting the balance of gut bacteria, and triggering chronic systemic inflammation. Still, a definite cause-and-effect relationship has not been established. Overall, observational studies consistently demonstrate an association between the consumption of UPFs and an increased risk of cancer, although causality remains uncertain.
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.