ArticleBMC public health2026
Ultra processed food consumption and nutrients adequacy among cancer survivors in Lebanon.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evidence on the impact of ultra-processed food (UPF) intake on diet quality among cancer survivors remains limited. This study examined UPF consumption and nutrient intake adequacy among cancer survivors in Lebanon.In this cross-sectional study, adult cancer survivors in remission for at least three months were recruited from two medical centers. Dietary intake was assessed using a validated food frequency questionnaire (FFQ), and food items were categorized according to the NOVA classification. Nutrient adequacy ratio (NAR) and mean adequacy ratio (MAR) were calculated. Participant characteristics, nutrient adequacy, and macronutrient intakes were compared across UPF quartiles using Chi-square tests, and ANOVA. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of nutrient inadequacy.The study included 268 participants (mean age: 59 years; 83% female). UPF accounted for 8 ± 7% of total food weight and 17.5 ± 11% of energy intake. Most participants did not meet requirements for potassium (95%), vitamin A (87%), and vitamin D (99%) with mean intakes of 2,527 ± 1236 mg, 350 ± 175 Retinol Activity Equivalents, and 0.8 ± 1.2 µg, respectively. Higher UPF intake was significantly associated with higher energy (p < 0.001), carbohydrate (p < 0.001), protein (p = 0.017), fat (p < 0.001), and saturated fat intake (p < 0.001), and with lower vitamin C adequacy (p = 0.02). In multivariable analysis, higher education predicted lower odds of nutrient inadequacy (AOR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.1–0.65, p = 0.004), while UPF intake did not.Despite the relatively low UPF contribution, significant micronutrient inadequacies were observed among cancer survivors. These findings underscore the importance of integrating dietary counseling into cancer care to address nutrient gaps and promote healthier food choices.
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.