ReviewFrontiers in nutrition2026
The progress on stevia (
Review in Frontiers in nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Steviol Glycosides (E960) FromFood science & nutrition · 2026Review
- Comparative Antioxidant Evaluation and GC-MS Identification of Bioactive Constituents inMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Stevia-derived sweeteners in reduced-sugar foods: formulation strategies, sensory optimization, nutritional evidence, and safety perspectives.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, and CNKI (Jan 2005-Sep 2025) using keywords related to Stevia yielded over 17,600 records. After deduplication and screening, around 200 full-text articles were evaluated. Additional key references were identified through citation tracking. Ultimately, over 140 sources were gathered to create a comprehensive overview prioritizing significant evidence. Results: The findings reveal that SGs are not metabolized in the upper gastrointestinal tract but are hydrolyzed exclusively by gut microbiota to steviol, accounting for their negligible caloric impact. Stevia extracts and their constituents exhibit a broad spectrum of potent pharmacological activities, including antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-hyperglycemic, anti-hyperlipidemic, and hepatorenal protective effects, mediated through diverse molecular mechanisms. Toxicological evaluations confirm the safety of SGs, establishing an Acceptable Daily Intake of 4 mg kg Conclusion: This review integrates multidisciplinary evidence on SGs-encompassing chemistry, pharmacology, toxicology, applications, biosynthesis, and regulation-to create a cohesive synthesis and actionable visual frameworks. These resources aim to offer an evidence-based foundation for industry professionals, regulatory bodies, and researchers to effectively address critical priorities and identified gaps.
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.