Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41858534›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2026

Does the definition of human ultra-processed foods apply to dog and cat foods? A review of pet food processing techniques, their impact on health, and a call for pet food processing classification.

Jirayu Tanprasertsuk, Devon E Tate, Dominique S Tarr, Justin Shmalberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jirayu TanprasertsukResearch & Development, KatKin, London, United Kingdom.
Devon E TateResearch & Development, KatKin, London, United Kingdom.
Dominique S TarrResearch & Development, KatKin, London, United Kingdom.
Justin ShmalbergDepartment of Comparative, Diagnostic, and Population Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence linking higher intake of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) with increased risk of chronic diseases in humans has grown since the establishment of the NOVA classification and its widespread adoption in nutrition research. Extruded dry and wet diets for cats and dogs (commonly known as kibble and canned/tinned foods) share many features with human UPFs. As these formats are the predominant pet diets in developed countries, similar concerns have been raised. However, progress in this field is constrained by the absence of a clear definition of UPFs in pet nutrition. This Perspective outlines the human UPF definition, with emphasis on the NOVA classification, and reviews mechanisms proposed to explain their negative health impacts in humans. We then compile the current state of knowledge on pet food processing across both traditional dry and wet diets and emerging dietary formats, illustrating the diversity of products available and their potential implications for canine and feline health. We argue that findings from human UPF research cannot be directly extrapolated to dogs and cats, but highlight the need to develop an objective, systematic classification of pet foods based on processing levels. Such a framework would enable research into health effects of processing in companion animals while incorporating the perspectives of manufacturers, regulators, and researchers. Finally, we propose a set of key factors that should inform this classification to reflect the diversity of pet food formats and facilitate its acceptance and use within the veterinary nutrition and pet food research communities.

Indexed as

caninecannedcompanion animalextrudedfelinefood processingNOVAultra-processed food

Identifiers

PMID41858534
PMCPMC12997800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.