Ultra-processed food intake and risk of type 2 diabetes: a pooled analysis of three prospective cohorts of Korean adults and an updated meta-analysis
Kim Y, Cho Y, Koo B, Chen Z, Sun Q, Oh H
European journal of epidemiology · 5 citas
Cómo se estudió
- Diseño
- Metaanálisis (indexado por PubMed)
- Estudiado en
- Personas
- Resultado principal
- Eventos clínicos como enfermedad o muerte
- Consumo medido con
- Cuestionario de frecuencia de consumo
Quién lo pagó
- Financiación
- Financiación independiente
- Gobierno
- National Research Foundation of Korea
- Subvenciones
- National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2023S1A5C2A03095169); National Research Foundation of Korea (RS-2025-00556008)
Según 1 financiador declarado.
Publicación
- Publicado
- 2025-09-16 · Eur J Epidemiol · vol. 40 · número 11 · págs. 1293–1305
- Editorial
- Springer Science+Business Media
- Citado
- 4 citas · más que el 93% de estudios similares · 3.6× el promedio de su campo
- Impacto
- Entre el 10 % más citado de su campo
- Referencias
- 44 trabajos
- Acceso
- Acceso abierto (copia en repositorio) · OTHER-OA
- Áreas de investigación
- Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling · Nutritional Studies and Diet · Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
- Palabras clave
- Prospective cohort study, Quartile, Type 2 diabetes, Pooled analysis, Hazard ratio, Proportional hazards model, Confidence interval, Relative risk, Diabetes mellitus
- MeSH
- humans, diabetes mellitus, type 2, diet, proportional hazards models, risk factors, prospective studies, adult, middle aged, female, male, republic of korea, fast foods, food, processed
6 autores
- Yujin Kim🇰🇷Korea University
- Yoonkyoung Cho🇰🇷🇺🇸Korea University; University of Michigan
- Bo Kyung Koo🇰🇷🇯🇵Korea University; Korea University
- Zhangling Chen🇨🇳🇳🇱Central South University; Erasmus MC; Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University
- Qi Sun🇺🇸Brigham and Women's Hospital; Harvard University
- Hannah Oh🇰🇷🇮🇳🇯🇵 · autor de correspondenciaKorea University; Department of Public; Korea University
Resumen
El texto original del estudio, en el idioma en que se publicó.
Studies suggest a positive association between ultra-processed food (UPF) intake and type 2 diabetes risk. However, studies were primarily conducted in Western populations with diets and disease profiles different from populations living elsewhere. In addition, the dose-response relationship needs to be further elucidated. We conducted an individual-level pooled analysis of three Korean prospective cohorts (n = 72,776). UPF intake (in the percentage of g/d as the main UPF unit) was assessed using validated food frequency questionnaires and categorized according to Nova classification. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We subsequently conducted a meta-analysis of prospective studies, including recent studies from both Western and non-Western populations, to assess the dose-response relationship. In a pooled analysis of Korean cohorts (up to 18 years of follow-up), the highest (vs. lowest) quartile of UPF intake was associated with an increased type 2 diabetes risk (pooled HR [95% CI] = 1.11 [1.02, 1.21] , p-trend = 0.03). The positive association persisted after additional adjustment for BMI, nutritional factors (fiber, sodium, and carbohydrate intakes), or diet quality score. Among individual UPF subgroups, processed meats, ready-to-eat/heat mixed dishes, and ice cream were positively associated with diabetes risk. In a meta-analysis of 17 prospective cohorts, every 10% (of g/d) increment in UPF intake was associated with a 10% (summary RR [95% CI] = 1.10 [1.08, 1.12] ) higher risk in a dose-response fashion. Our meta-evidence supports that higher UPF intake may monotonically increase type 2 diabetes risk.
Resumen vía Europe PMC. Los derechos de autor siguen siendo de los autores o la editorial.
Confianza de la comunidad
Cargando…
¿Cuánto confías en los hallazgos de este estudio?
Comentarios
¿Algo está mal aquí?
Señala este estudio si su información, etiquetas o financiación parecen incorrectas. Un editor revisa cada señalamiento.
Información educativa sobre investigación publicada. No es consejo médico ni una recomendación para empezar o dejar nada.