Skip to content

Systematic Review

Frontiers in Nutrition ·

Volume 13 - 2026 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2026.1916253

Global research landscape and emerging frontiers of ultra-processed food intake and cardiometabolic health: a bibliometric and knowledge-mapping analysis (2015–2025)

  • Tianao Chen1
  • Ping Ni1
  • Minxin Li1
  • Haijun Ma1
  • Jin Dai1
  • You Yu1,2*corresponding author
  • Rui Yu1*corresponding author
  1. 1Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shenyang, Liaoning, China
  2. 2Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine Affiliated Second Hospital, Shenyang, Liaoning, China
Article metrics0 viewsView details

Abstract

Bibliometric and visual analysis of research on ultra-processed food (UPF) intake and cardiometabolic health from 2015 to 2025. Publications from 2015 to 2025 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) and Scopus databases. Analyses were conducted using R software (bibliometrix package), VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and Origin 2018. Scholarly output in this field demonstrated a continuous growth trajectory throughout the study period, with the steepest rise concentrated between 2020 and 2021. Brazil led in publication output, followed by the United States and China. The University of São Paulo ranked first among contributing institutions. Nutrients, Public Health Nutrition, and Frontiers in Nutrition were the most productive journals, while Public Health Nutrition, Nutrients, and the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition dominated the co-citation network. Prominent keywords included obesity, cardiovascular diseases, children, dietary patterns, and diabetes mellitus, reflecting the central themes of this field. Bibliometric analysis identified three key research hotspots: the association between UPF intake and cardiometabolic diseases (CMDs); the association between UPF consumption and early cardiometabolic impairment in children and adolescents; and mechanisms underlying food matrix disruption and food additive-mediated cardiometabolic dysregulation. Global research interest in the relationship between UPF intake and cardiometabolic health has grown substantially over the past decade. This study provides a comprehensive mapping of the current research landscape, key hotspots, and emerging frontiers in this field, offering a valuable reference for future investigations and public health interventions.

Keywords

1 Introduction

Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) were first conceptualized by Monteiro and colleagues at the University of São Paulo, Brazil, in 2009. The NOVA classification system categorizes all foods into four groups: unprocessed or minimally processed foods, processed culinary ingredients, processed foods, and UPFs (1, 2). NOVA has been widely applied in nutritional epidemiology and public health research to investigate the associations of UPF intake with diet quality and its potential effects on human health (3, 4). UPFs are industrially formulated products derived primarily from food-source extracts and industrially synthesized substances, typically containing emulsifiers, artificial sweeteners, flavorings, colorants, and other food additives, and are specifically designed to maximize palatability, convenience, and consumer appeal (5). Compared with unprocessed foods, UPFs generally exhibit higher energy density and higher levels of saturated fat, added sugars, and sodium, while providing substantially lower amounts of dietary fiber, vitamins, and other protective nutrients (6). In recent decades, UPF consumption has risen markedly worldwide. In high-income countries such as the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia, UPFs now account for a substantial proportion of total dietary energy intake (7, 8). Concurrently, sales of UPFs are growing rapidly across many middle-income countries (9). Given their widespread consumption and potential adverse health effects, UPFs have emerged as a major focus of contemporary nutritional science and public health research.

Against the backdrop of rising UPF consumption, the association between UPFs and cardiometabolic diseases (CMDs) has attracted increasing scientific attention. CMDs encompass a cluster of conditions defined by cardiovascular, metabolic, and inflammatory dysregulation, including obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), hypertension, dyslipidemia, metabolic syndrome, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) (10–13). These conditions share substantial pathophysiological overlap, commonly manifesting as chronic low-grade inflammation, impaired glucose and lipid metabolism, oxidative stress, and endothelial dysfunction, and collectively represent a growing global public health burden (14–18). Extensive epidemiological and interventional evidence indicates that high UPF intake is closely associated with elevated risks of obesity, insulin resistance, T2DM, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular events (19–24). The underlying mechanisms likely involve multiple pathways, including gut microbiota dysbiosis, toxic effects of food additives, overconsumption driven by ultra-high energy density, and nutrient displacement effects.

Although the volume of research on UPFs and cardiometabolic health has expanded rapidly in recent years, existing reviews have predominantly focused on specific mechanistic pathways or individual cardiometabolic disease outcomes, with limited integrative analysis. However, studies using bibliometric analysis and visualized knowledge mapping to systematically characterize the overall knowledge structure, evolution of research hotspots, and emerging frontiers of this field from 2015 to 2025 remain scarce. Given that the UPF concept was established within the NOVA system and that NOVA is widely used in epidemiological research to identify and classify UPFs (3, 4, 6, 7), the present study adopted NOVA as the principal conceptual framework for interpreting the retrieved literature and mapping the knowledge structure of this field. The present study therefore aims to characterize the developmental trajectory, research hotspots, and frontier directions of UPF–CMD research through a comprehensive bibliometric analysis, complemented by an integrative synthesis of mechanistic evidence, to elucidate the roles of UPFs in the onset and progression of CMDs and identify potential intervention strategies. These findings are intended to provide a theoretical foundation and research directions for future basic research, clinical translation, and public health interventions.

2 Data sources and methods

Bibliometric analysis is a methodological approach that applies mathematical and statistical techniques to comprehensively evaluate publications on a defined topic over a specific time period, integrating both quantitative and qualitative perspectives (25). This data-driven framework characterizes the current status, research hotspots, developmental trajectories, and emerging frontiers of a given field by examining publication output trends, contributions from countries and institutions, author collaboration networks, journal influence, citation and co-citation structures, and keyword co-occurrence and burst patterns (26). With recent advances in scientometrics, visualization techniques, and big-data processing technologies, bibliometric analysis has been widely adopted across medicine and the life sciences to map knowledge landscapes, identify research gaps, and inform strategic decision-making.

2.1 Data sources

Data for this study were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) and the Scopus database, covering the period from 2015 to 2025. The full search strategies are provided in Supplementary Appendix 1. All searches were conducted on March 19, 2026. For both database searches, document types were restricted to articles and review articles, and the language filter was set to English. Following the PRISMA guidelines, two independent researchers screened the retrieved records to exclude irrelevant studies, and disagreements were resolved through discussion with the involvement of a third researcher. The remaining records were saved in plain text format and exported as complete records with full reference lists. Duplicate records were identified and removed based on DOI and title. The screening process is illustrated in the flow diagram in Figure 1. Considering that merging records from different databases may lead to inconsistencies or potential loss of critical information, including cited references and citation counts, which could affect subsequent bibliometric analyses, the WoSCC and Scopus datasets were analyzed separately to preserve data integrity. The primary bibliometric analyses were performed based on the WoSCC dataset. The Scopus dataset was used for complementary analyses, including annual publication trends, corresponding-author country distribution, and keyword co-occurrence clustering. The results obtained from both databases were subsequently comprehensively interpreted to identify research hotspots and emerging trends in this field.

PRISMA flow diagram.
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram.

2.2 Data analysis methods

Temporal trends in annual publication output were examined using Origin 2018. Bibliometric assessment and knowledge visualization were carried out using the bibliometrix package (v5.0.1) in R (v4.5.1), VOSviewer (v1.6.20), and CiteSpace (v6.4). Specifically, bibliometrix was used to quantify the publication contributions of different countries, institutions, and journals; identify the most-cited references; calculate keyword frequencies; and conduct trend-topic analysis. The resulting figures were generated using the ggplot2 package in R. VOSviewer (v1.6.20) was specifically used to construct and visualize country and institutional collaboration networks, journal co-citation networks, and keyword co-occurrence networks. CiteSpace (v6.4) was used to identify references with strong citation bursts and analyze the duration of these bursts. Journal impact factor (IF) data were sourced from the 2026 Journal Citation Reports (JCR) released by Clarivate on June 17, 2026.

For the VOSviewer analyses, the following thresholds were applied to the WoSCC dataset: a minimum of 5 publications per country for the country collaboration network, a minimum of 4 publications per institution for the institutional collaboration network, and a minimum of 20 citations per journal for the journal co-citation network. For keyword co-occurrence analysis, minimum occurrence thresholds of 4 and 10 were set for the WoSCC and Scopus datasets, respectively.

To prevent keyword clusters from being dominated by search terms, major query keywords (e.g., “ultra-processed food”) and non-specific high-frequency terms (e.g., “humans,” “health,” “disease”) were excluded from the keyword co-occurrence analysis. In addition, keywords with identical or similar meanings, including synonyms, referring to the same concept, and duplicate keywords with different singular and plural forms, were standardized and merged before clustering analysis. This preprocessing step was performed to improve keyword consistency, reduce redundancy, and enhance the accuracy and representativeness of the resulting keyword clusters.

3 Results

3.1 Overview of included publications

After applying the full screening procedure, 480 eligible documents were ultimately retained from the WoSCC. As illustrated in Figure 2A, scholarly output in this field followed a consistent upward trajectory over the study period (2015–2025), with the sharpest acceleration observed between 2020 and 2021. Publications reached their decadal peak in 2025, amounting to 108 articles. In parallel, 549 unique documents were retrieved from the Scopus database. The overall growth trajectory in Scopus was highly consistent with that observed in WoSCC: in addition to the marked increase between 2020 and 2021, Scopus also showed a notable rise in publications between 2022 and 2023 (Supplementary Figure S1). This sustained upward trend reflects growing scholarly interest in this field and underscores the increasing research attention directed toward the relationship between UPF intake and cardiometabolic health.

Trends in annual publications in the field of ultra-processed food intake and cardiometabolic health, 2015–2025. **(A)** Trends in publishing outputs, by year. **(B)** Distribution of corresponding authors’ countries and cooperation.
Figure 2. Trends in annual publications in the field of ultra-processed food intake and cardiometabolic health, 2015–2025. (A) Trends in publishing outputs, by year. (B) Distribution of corresponding authors’ countries and cooperation.

Analysis of corresponding author countries revealed that Brazil led in publication output, contributing 147 articles, followed by the United States (n = 82), China (n = 32), Spain (n = 25), and Iran (n = 24). Regarding international collaboration, Brazil (n = 39) and the United States (n = 32) emerged as the dominant hubs of the global co-authorship network among the top ten countries, reflecting their substantial overall publication volumes. Notably, European and Oceanian countries demonstrated a strong propensity for international collaboration, with Australia recording the highest international collaboration rate at 78.6%, followed by Spain (76.0%) and the United Kingdom (64.3%) (Figure 2B; Table 1). Complementary analysis of the Scopus dataset revealed a geographical distribution broadly consistent with that observed in the WoSCC dataset (Supplementary Figure S2). Brazil remained the most productive country, contributing 144 publications, followed by the United States (n = 86) and China (n = 31).

Table 1. Most relevant countries by corresponding authors of the relationship.

No.CountryArticles (n)Articles %SCPMCPMCP %
1Brazil14730.61083926.5
2USA8217.1503239.0
3China326.7221031.3
4Spain255.261976.0
5Iran245111354.2
6Italy204.215525.0
7Canada173.58952.9
8Korea163.313318.8
9Australia142.931178.6
10United Kingdom142.95964.3

MCP, multiple country publication; SCP, single country publication.

As illustrated in Figure 3A, Brazil and the United States maintained extensive collaborative ties with other countries in the field of UPF intake and cardiometabolic health. Figure 3B and Table 2 show that among the top 20 most productive institutions, Brazil (n = 7) and the United States (n = 7) jointly dominated, followed by Iran (n = 3), Spain (n = 2), and Australia (n = 1). The University of São Paulo ranked first with 89 publications, an output more than twice that of the second-ranked institution, the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health.

Map of cooperation between different countries/regions in the field of ultra-processed food intake and cardiometabolic health, 2015–2025. **(A)** Map of cooperation between different countries/regions. **(B)** Map of cooperation between different institutions.
Figure 3. Map of cooperation between different countries/regions in the field of ultra-processed food intake and cardiometabolic health, 2015–2025. (A) Map of cooperation between different countries/regions. (B) Map of cooperation between different institutions.

Table 2. Top 20 most productive institutions based on corresponding-author affiliations.

No.AffiliationCountryArticles (n)
1Universidade de São Paulo (University of São Paulo)Brazil89
2Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public HealthUSA38
3Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (Federal University of Minas Gerais)Brazil23
4Deakin UniversityAustralia16
5Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Oswaldo Cruz Foundation)Brazil15
6Harvard Medical SchoolUSA15
7Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Federal University of São Paulo)Brazil15
8New York UniversityUSA14
9Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul)Brazil14
10Johns Hopkins UniversityUSA13
11Universidad de Navarra (University of Navarra)Spain13
12Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthUSA12
13Tehran University of Medical SciencesIran12
14Brigham and Women’s HospitalUSA11
15Instituto de Salud Carlos III (Carlos III Health Institute)Spain11
16Isfahan University of Medical SciencesIran11
17Shahid Beheshti University of Medical SciencesIran11
18Tufts UniversityUSA10
19Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (Federal University of Rio de Janeiro)Brazil10
20Universidade Federal de Viçosa (Federal University of Viçosa)Brazil10

3.2 Publication journals and co-cited journals

To identify the journals with the highest publication output and citation contribution in this field, the bibliometrix package in R was employed for quantitative assessment, and graphical outputs were rendered through the ggplot2 package. Co-citation relationships among journals were subsequently mapped using VOSviewer.

Within the WoSCC dataset, the 480 included publications were distributed across 172 academic journals. As shown in Figure 4A and Table 3, Nutrients (n = 51; IF = 5.8) published the greatest number of relevant articles, followed by Public Health Nutrition (n = 22; IF = 3.0) and Frontiers in Nutrition (n = 18; IF = 5.5). In terms of citation counts, Public Health Nutrition received the highest number of citations (n = 1,850; IF = 3.0), followed by Nutrients (n = 1,487; IF = 5.8) and the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (n = 1,089; IF = 7.1) (Figure 4B; Table 4). As illustrated in Figure 5, the co-cited journal map identified Public Health Nutrition, Nutrients, and the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition as the structural cores of the co-citation network.

Journals with the largest number of articles published and the journal with the largest number of citations. **(A)** Journals with the most published articles. **(B)** Most-cited journals.
Figure 4. Journals with the largest number of articles published and the journal with the largest number of citations. (A) Journals with the most published articles. (B) Most-cited journals.

Table 3. Top 10 journals with the most published articles.

JournalsArticles (n)Citations (n)IF (2026)
Nutrients511,4875.8
Public Health Nutrition2218503.0
Frontiers in Nutrition182225.5
British Journal of Nutrition175843.1
Clinical Nutrition133007.9
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition111,0897.1
Nutrition Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases112533.9
Nutrition101203.6
Journal of Nutrition83604.2
Pediatric Obesity8792.5

Table 4. Top 10 most-cited journals.

JournalsCitations (n)Articles (n)IF (2026)
Public Health Nutrition1850223.0
Nutrients1,487515.8
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition1,089117.1
BMJ759555.1
British Journal of Nutrition584173.1
Obesity Reviews58377.6
PLoS One46862.8
LANCET4551109.0
Journal of Nutrition36084.2
Circulation351241.3
Co-cited journals involved in the field of ultra-processed food intake and cardiometabolic health.
Figure 5. Co-cited journals involved in the field of ultra-processed food intake and cardiometabolic health.

These findings indicate that the journals listed above exert considerable academic influence in the field of UPF intake and cardiometabolic health. A noteworthy convergence was observed between journals ranking highest in publication volume and those accumulating the greatest citation impact, indicating that these outlets simultaneously function as leading platforms for emerging research and as cornerstones of the field’s accumulated knowledge.

3.3 Most-cited references and citation burst analysis

To explore the frontier developments and research directions in this field, the top 20 most-cited references were identified using the bibliometrix package in R. As presented in Table 5, these articles had received at least 339 citations and were published across 17 academic journals. This broad source diversity suggests that landmark research in this field is inherently multidisciplinary, necessitating continued investigation across a wider range of dimensions. Notably, the BMJ, Nutrients, and Obesity Reviews each contributed two articles to the top 20 most-cited list, indicating a high degree of scholarly influence for these journals within the field; however, no single journal has yet established absolute dominance among highly cited publications in this area.

Table 5. Top 20 most-cited references.

No.PaperDOITotal citations (n)TC per year
1SWINBURN BA, 2019, LANCET10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32822-832822-8)2040255.00
2HALL KD, 2019, CELL METAB10.1016/j.cmet.2019.05.0081,288161.00
3LICHTENSTEIN AH, 2021, CIRCULATION10.1161/CIR.0000000000001031746124.33
4PAGLIAI G, 2021, BRIT J NUTR10.1017/S0007114520002688739123.17
5SROUR B, 2019, BMJ10.1136/bmj.l145168685.75
6LANE MM, 2024, BMJ10.1136/bmj-2023-077310587195.67
7ELIZABETH L, 2020, NUTRIENTS10.3390/nu1207195553977.00
8MOUBARAC JC, 2017, APPETITE10.1016/j.appet.2016.11.00649249.20
9LANE MM, 2021, OBES REV10.1111/obr.1314647879.67
10LOUZADA MLD, 2015, PREV MED10.1016/j.ypmed.2015.07.01846038.33
11MENDONÇA RD, 2016, AM J CLIN NUTR10.3945/ajcn.116.13500445040.91
12RAUBER F, 2018, NUTRIENTS10.3390/nu1005058744649.56
13POPKIN BM, 2022, OBES REV10.1111/obr.1336637575.00
14CHEN XJ, 2020, NUTR J10.1186/s12937-020-00604-137453.43
15MONTEIRO CA, 2018, PUBLIC HEALTH NUTR10.1017/S136898001700137936941.00
16RAUBER F, 2015, NUTR METAB CARDIOVAS10.1016/j.numecd.2014.08.00135629.67
17MENDONÇA RD, 2017, AM J HYPERTENS10.1093/ajh/hpw13735635.60
18SROUR B, 2020, JAMA INTERN MED10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.594235550.71
19BARALDI LG, 2018, BMJ OPEN10.1136/bmjopen-2017-02057434037.78
20ASKARI M, 2020, INT J OBESITY10.1038/s41366-020-00650-z33948.43

TC, total citations.

The three most-cited articles were “The Global Syndemic of Obesity, Undernutrition, and Climate Change: The Lancet Commission Report” (n = 2,040), “Ultra-Processed Diets Cause Excess Calorie Intake and Weight Gain: An Inpatient Randomized Controlled Trial of Ad Libitum Food Intake” (n = 1,288), and “2021 Dietary Guidance to Improve Cardiovascular Health: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association” (n = 746). These three articles represent not merely overviews of the field, but rather exemplify three distinct research paradigms: a large-scale public health epidemiological report, a clinical randomized controlled trial (RCT), and an authoritative dietary guideline for cardiovascular health, respectively.

To further characterize prominent citation bursts in the UPF–cardiometabolic health literature, CiteSpace was employed to identify 25 references with significant citation bursts. As shown in Figure 6, the three references with the highest burst strength were “Ultraprocessed food consumption and risk of overweight and obesity: the University of Navarra Follow-Up (SUN) cohort study” (Strength = 26.78), “Consumption of ultra-processed food products and its effects on children’s lipid profiles: a longitudinal study” (Strength = 21.91), and “Ultra-Processed Food Consumption and the Incidence of Hypertension in a Mediterranean Cohort: The Seguimiento Universidad de Navarra Project” (Strength = 18.75). The three most recently emergent articles were “Consumption of ultra-processed foods and cancer risk: results from NutriNet-Santé prospective cohort,” “Ultra-processed Food Intake and Obesity: What Really Matters for Health—Processing or Nutrient Content?” and “The share of ultra-processed foods determines the overall nutritional quality of diets in Brazil.” Taken together, the analysis of highly cited references and citation burst patterns identified four recurrent thematic clusters in the UPF–CMD field: (1) UPFs influence the onset and progression of CMDs through the mediating effects of overweight and obesity; (2) the association between UPF consumption and the incidence of specific CMD endpoints; (3) UPF-induced metabolic risk through alterations in dietary nutrient composition; and (4) the early cardiometabolic harms of UPF consumption in children and adolescents.

Top 25 references with the strongest citation bursts.
Figure 6. Top 25 references with the strongest citation bursts.

3.4 Keyword co-occurrence clustering and temporal evolution analysis

Keyword co-occurrence analysis is a widely used tool for rapidly identifying major research themes and directions within a specific academic field. A total of 1,594 keywords were extracted from the WoSCC dataset. Table 6 lists the top 20 keywords with a frequency of ≥ 30 occurrences, among which the most frequent were “obesity” (n = 240), “consumption” (n = 156), “cardiovascular diseases” (n = 129), “nutrition” (n = 86), and “children” (n = 78). Keywords with a minimum occurrence threshold of 4 were visualized using VOSviewer, generating a keyword co-occurrence map (Figure 7) that comprised five distinct clusters, each represented by a different color. Cluster 1 (red nodes; 40 keywords) focused on the association between UPF exposure and overweight/obesity in children and adolescents, with representative keywords including obesity, children, adolescents, overweight, and food intake. Cluster 2 (green nodes; 38 keywords) addressed the role of UPFs in dietary patterns and their impact on chronic disease risk, with representative keywords including nutrition, all-cause mortality, dietary patterns, Mediterranean diet, and physical activity. Cluster 3 (blue nodes; 32 keywords) encompassed the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying UPF-induced cardiometabolic dysregulation, with representative keywords including cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, metabolic syndrome, blood pressure, insulin resistance, inflammation, gut microbiota, atherosclerosis, and oxidative stress. Cluster 4 (yellow nodes; 20 keywords) covered UPF-associated glucose metabolic disturbances and diabetes risk in the context of nutritional transition, with representative keywords including diabetes mellitus, diet quality, sugars, nutrition transition, artificial sweeteners, glucose, and glycation end-products. Cluster 5 (purple nodes; 12 keywords) captured research on dietary assessment, classification frameworks, and nutritional intervention policies for UPFs in the context of cardiometabolic health, with representative keywords including consumption, adults, quality, nutrient profile, dietary energy density, and food-processing industry.

Table 6. Top 20 keywords by occurrence frequency.

RankKeywordsOccurrences
1obesity240
2consumption156
3cardiovascular diseases129
4nutrition86
5children78
6adults72
7all-cause mortality69
8dietary patterns67
9adolescents63
10overweight60
11quality55
12diabetes mellitus54
13hypertension44
14diet quality39
15metabolic syndrome39
16food intake37
17body mass index33
18cohort studies33
19body weight31
20food processing30
Keyword co-occurrence map of publications.
Figure 7. Keyword co-occurrence map of publications.

Parallel keyword co-occurrence analysis of the Scopus dataset identified four key research domains (Supplementary Figure S3): (1) the association between UPF intake and dietary patterns, nutritional composition, and diet quality; (2) UPF-related energy metabolic dysregulation and obesity-associated cardiometabolic risk; (3) the association between UPFs and the onset and progression of CMDs, including underlying pathological mechanisms; and (4) epidemiological investigations and population-level risk assessment of UPF-associated CMD risk. All keywords within these four clusters are presented in the Supplementary Table S1.

Thematic progression within this field was further explored by generating a topic evolution map through the bibliometrix package in R (Figure 8). During the period from 2016 to 2019, the field remained at an exploratory stage of development. Prominent terms included “prospective studies,” “drink products,” “likely impact,” “child nutrition,” “pregnant women,” “share,” and “risk factor,” indicating that early research primarily focused on the preliminary characterization of UPF-related dietary exposures and began to examine the potential links between their dietary share, specific product categories, and cardiometabolic risk through prospective studies. Between 2020 and 2021, the thematic emphasis gradually shifted toward the health burden, nutritional composition, and assessment methods associated with UPFs. Representative terms included “burden,” “unhealthy food,” “macronutrients,” “nutritional quality,” “national-health,” “validation,” and “products,” reflecting increasing efforts to systematically evaluate the nutritional attributes and public health implications of UPFs. From 2022 to 2023, “ultra-processed foods,” “obesity,” “risk factors,” and “cardiovascular diseases” emerged as the most frequent and representative terms, while “diets,” “food intake,” “overweight,” and “quality” remained prominent. During this period, the research focus shifted from the early characterization of dietary exposure and nutritional quality toward the systematic evaluation of associations between UPF intake and obesity, overweight, cardiovascular diseases, and related risk factors. In the most recent period from 2024 to 2025, research themes extended further toward abnormalities in glucose metabolism, disease prevention, and a broader range of health outcomes. “Dietary patterns,” “diabetes mellitus,” “prevention,” and “insulin resistance” constituted the most prominent terms during this period, indicating that the field was moving beyond broad associations with obesity and cardiovascular risk toward a more focused investigation of glucose metabolic dysregulation and preventive strategies.

Trending topics in the field of ultra-processed food intake and cardiometabolic health.
Figure 8. Trending topics in the field of ultra-processed food intake and cardiometabolic health.

3.5 Integrated analysis of research hotspots

An integrated examination of citation burst patterns, keyword occurrence frequencies, co-occurrence cluster structures, and longitudinal thematic shifts enabled the identification and consolidation of emerging research priorities in the domain of UPF intake and cardiometabolic health. The results collectively point to three predominant focal areas that characterize the current research landscape. (1) Association between UPF intake and CMDs: UPFs may increase the risk of CVD by promoting weight gain, inducing or exacerbating T2DM, dyslipidemia, and hypertension. (2) Association between UPF consumption and early cardiometabolic impairment in children and adolescents: UPFs may elevate the long-term risk of CMDs in children and adolescents by promoting obesity, shaping dietary habits, and inducing early disturbances in glucose and lipid metabolism. (3) Mechanisms underlying food matrix disruption and food additive-mediated cardiometabolic dysregulation: UPFs may promote cardiometabolic dysregulation through multiple pathways, including inflammatory responses, gut microbiota imbalance, impaired insulin signaling, and vascular endothelial dysfunction.

4 Discussion

4.1 General characteristics

To better characterize the research priorities and emerging trends in the field of UPF intake and cardiometabolic health, this study conducted a comprehensive bibliometric analysis with data visualization. A systematic search of the WoSCC identified 480 publications from 2015 to 2025. Analysis of publication trends revealed a steady increase in annual research output throughout this period. The most pronounced increase in WoSCC occurred between 2020 and 2021, whereas Scopus exhibited an additional increase between 2022 and 2023. This additional growth may reflect the rapid accumulation of evidence demonstrating associations between UPF intake and obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, and related metabolic risk factors, thereby underscoring the increasing scholarly interest and research activity in this field.

In terms of country distribution, Brazil led in publication output (n = 147), followed by the United States (n = 82) and China (n = 32). Among the top 20 most productive institutions, Brazil (7 institutions) and the United States (7 institutions) jointly dominated, followed by Iran (3 institutions), Spain (2 institutions), and Australia (1 institution), with the University of São Paulo ranking first with 89 publications. Brazil’s leading position in this field may be attributed to its theoretical primacy. Professor Carlos A. Monteiro and his team at the University of São Paulo developed the NOVA food classification system and formally defined the concept of UPFs, thereby establishing a globally recognized research paradigm and analytical framework for this field. Consequently, Brazil has accumulated a strong theoretical foundation, well-established national nutrition cohorts, and considerable academic influence in this research area. The United States represents another major contributor, supported by extensive national dietary surveys, large prospective cohorts, and strong institutional research capacity. These resources provide an important foundation for investigating the relationship between UPF intake and cardiometabolic outcomes. With exceptionally high UPF consumption and a substantial burden of obesity and cardiometabolic disease, the United States has emerged as a key setting for investigating the adverse health consequences of UPFs (27–29). China’s position among the leading contributors indicates growing research engagement in this field.

Analysis of the publication landscape revealed that the 480 included articles were distributed across 172 academic journals. Among these, Nutrients, Public Health Nutrition, and Frontiers in Nutrition served as the primary publication platforms in this field. Notably, Nutrients and Public Health Nutrition occupied the top two positions in both total citation counts and publication volume. This convergence not only reflects the broad recognition of the research published in these journals but also demonstrates their central role in establishing the field’s knowledge base and advancing its research frontiers. The predominance of nutrition- and public-health-oriented journals reflects the field’s origins in dietary classification, nutritional epidemiology, and population-level risk assessment. By contrast, the relatively limited participation of clinical cardiovascular journals may indicate that the translation of existing epidemiological evidence into cardiovascular clinical research remains insufficient. Future research should therefore place greater emphasis on translating the available evidence into effective disease-prevention strategies.

4.2 Research hotspots and emerging trends

As described above, through an integrated analysis of citation bursts, keyword frequency profiling, keyword co-occurrence clustering, and thematic evolution mapping, the emerging research hotspots in the field of UPF intake and cardiometabolic health were systematically identified. The findings strongly indicate that current frontier research in this field converges on three key directions: (1) association between UPF intake and CMDs; (2) association between UPF consumption and early cardiometabolic impairment in children and adolescents; and (3) mechanisms underlying food matrix disruption and food additive-mediated cardiometabolic dysregulation.

4.2.1 Association between UPF intake and CMDs

Keyword co-occurrence clusters showed that “obesity,” “cardiovascular diseases,” “diabetes mellitus,” “hypertension,” and “metabolic syndrome” constituted the core themes in this field. References exhibiting strong citation bursts also focused on the associations between UPF intake and overweight, obesity, hypertension, and other cardiometabolic outcomes.

Existing evidence indicates a consistent association between UPF intake and the risk of CMDs. UPF consumption may increase the risk of CVD through multiple pathways, including promotion of weight gain and induction or exacerbation of T2DM, dyslipidemia, and hypertension.

Regarding effects on body weight, observational evidence has consistently associated higher UPF intake with weight gain and abdominal obesity (23, 30–33). In an RCT, the ultra-processed and unprocessed diets offered were matched for energy content and macronutrient composition; however, under ad libitum conditions, participants consumed approximately 500 kcal/day more during the ultra-processed diet phase, accompanied by gains of approximately 0.9 kg in body weight and 0.4 kg in body fat over 2 weeks (34).

Regarding effects on glucose metabolism, multiple cohort studies and meta-analyses have indicated that total UPF intake is associated with a higher risk of T2DM (35–37). In a U.S. population-based cohort, comparison of the highest versus lowest quintiles of total UPF intake yielded a hazard ratio of 1.46 for T2DM (95% CI: 1.39–1.54) (36). The same study identified positive associations between type 2 diabetes risk and the consumption of ultra-processed refined grains, animal-based products, artificially sweetened and sugar-sweetened beverages, ready-to-eat or ready-to-heat mixed dishes, and sauces, spreads, and condiments (36).

Regarding effects on lipid metabolism, high UPF intake has been significantly associated with incident hypertriglyceridemia (≥150 mg/dL). Among individuals free of dyslipidemia at baseline, those in the highest tertile of energy intake from UPFs had 2.66 times the odds of developing hypertriglyceridemia compared with those in the lowest tertile (38).

Regarding effects on blood pressure, high UPF consumption was found to significantly increase the risk of incident hypertension (37, 39). Cohort data further demonstrated a dose–response relationship, with hypertension incidence rising progressively across quartiles of UPF intake (40). Additionally, higher body mass index and diet quality were found to mediate the association between UPF intake and hypertension incidence differently in Black and White adults, a relationship that may partly be attributed to excessive dietary sodium intake, which elevates blood pressure through impaired renal sodium handling, sodium and water retention, and expansion of blood volume (40, 41).

Beyond individual metabolic risk factors, UPF intake has also been closely associated with hard cardiovascular endpoints, including cardiovascular events and mortality. Evidence from cohort studies and meta-analyses indicates that increasing UPF consumption is linearly associated with cardiovascular event risk, while its association with all-cause mortality follows a non-linear pattern (42–45).

Overall, higher UPF intake has been associated with multiple cardiometabolic risk factors and clinical outcomes. Potential pathways include excess energy intake, adiposity, insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and altered blood pressure regulation, although the causal relationships require further investigation.

4.2.2 Association between UPF consumption and early cardiometabolic impairment in children and adolescents

The keyword clusters were characterized by terms such as “children,” “adolescents,” “obesity,” “overweight,” and “food intake,” while references exhibiting citation bursts also addressed lipid metabolism, overweight, and obesity in children. These findings indicate that early-life exposure to UPFs and their potential long-term cardiometabolic consequences have become important research hotspots in this field.

UPFs have become increasingly prevalent in modern diets, driven by their convenience, palatability, attractive appearance, and effective marketing strategies, all of which contribute to their widespread acceptance and high consumption among children and adolescents (46–49). Analysis of nationally representative data demonstrated that the majority of daily caloric intake among U.S. adolescents is derived from UPFs, with the estimated proportion of energy provided by UPFs rising from 61.4% in 1999 to 67.0% in 2018 (50). Evidence suggests that UPFs may begin to exert dysmetabolic effects as early as childhood (51). Early UPF intake has been closely associated with increased obesity risk in children; studies have shown that UPF consumption in preschool-aged children predicts subsequent waist circumference gain during school age, and that higher UPF intake is significantly and positively associated with body mass index, fat mass index, and central adiposity in children (51, 52).

Dietary preferences and habits established in early childhood are of critical importance, as they tend to persist and may exert lasting influence through adolescence and into adulthood (53, 54). On one hand, the characteristically high energy density, soft texture, and rapid consumption rate of UPFs may attenuate satiety signaling (55, 56). On the other hand, the intense reward stimulation generated by flavor-enhancing additives in UPFs may dysregulate feeding-related neural circuits, thereby facilitating overconsumption (57). Furthermore, individuals with UPF-addictive eating patterns have been reported to experience withdrawal-like symptoms upon attempting to reduce UPF intake, including headaches, fatigue, irritability, and intense cravings (58). Abdominal obesity associated with UPF consumption at age 8 years has been identified as a potential risk factor for subsequent impaired glucose metabolism, thereby increasing the probability of CVD in adulthood (51). UPF intake has additionally been shown to adversely affect lipid metabolism in children, with potential implications for future CVD risk. A longitudinal study found that children with higher UPF consumption at age 3 years had significantly elevated levels of total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by age 6 years (59).

Overall, childhood and adolescence may represent important periods of susceptibility to UPF-related cardiometabolic risk. However, the available evidence is predominantly observational, and the long-term causal effects remain uncertain.

4.2.3 Mechanisms underlying food matrix disruption and food additive-mediated cardiometabolic dysregulation

Terms identified through the keyword clustering and trend-topic analyses, including “insulin resistance,” “inflammation,” “gut microbiota,” “oxidative stress,” and “artificial sweeteners,” indicate that research is increasingly focusing on the biological pathways through which food matrix alterations and food additives may influence cardiometabolic health.

Industrial processing may partly contribute to the adverse health effects associated with UPFs by disrupting the native food matrix and introducing food additives (60). These characteristics may influence energy intake, satiety, inflammation, the gut microbiota, insulin signaling, and endothelial function.

In unprocessed whole plant foods, nutrients are typically encased within intact plant cell walls, protein networks, and dietary fiber structures (61, 62). This native food matrix slows nutrient release, increases the oral processing load, and enhances satiety (61, 63). In contrast, the extensive industrial processing of UPFs, including ultra-fine milling, extrusion, reconstitution, and refining, severely disrupts this matrix, rendering nutrients far more susceptible to rapid digestion and absorption (64). Matrix disruption reduces oral processing time during eating, may accelerate gastric emptying, and increases the efficiency of nutrient absorption, thereby facilitating excess energy intake (65–67). Studies indicate that ultra-processed diets may increase ad libitum energy intake and eating rate, potentially due to altered food structure and reduced oro-sensory exposure associated with industrial processing (34, 68). These accelerated eating and gastric emptying rates impair nutrient sensing in the distal gastrointestinal tract, thereby disrupting the secretion of key incretin and satiety hormones, including glucagon-like peptide-1 and peptide YY, and delaying the generation of satiety signals (69, 70). Rapid nutrient absorption also induces pronounced postprandial fluctuations in blood glucose and insulin levels, compounding metabolic load and promoting insulin resistance. Overall, current evidence consistently supports that ultra-processed diets increase energy intake; however, the independent contribution of food matrix disruption to the long-term onset and progression of CMDs remains insufficiently supported by high-quality longitudinal studies.

Beyond food matrix disruption, food additives widely used in UPFs may also contribute to metabolic dysregulation. Current research has focused primarily on emulsifiers, artificial sweeteners, and certain preservatives.

Emulsifiers are widely used to improve food texture and stability. Emerging evidence suggests that certain emulsifiers may contribute to cardiometabolic abnormalities by disrupting intestinal permeability, gut microbiota composition, and insulin signaling pathways. Carboxymethylcellulose, polysorbate-80, and carrageenan have been shown to alter gut microbial composition, compromise intestinal mucus layer integrity, and increase intestinal permeability, thereby inducing metabolic endotoxemia and chronic low-grade inflammation (71–75). In overweight individuals, carrageenan exposure was associated with reduced systemic and hepatic insulin sensitivity, accompanied by elevated inflammatory markers, including C-reactive protein and interleukin-6, and increased intestinal permeability (73). Removal of dietary carrageenan improved glycated hemoglobin and homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance levels in prediabetic participants, implicating this additive in insulin signaling impairment and glucose intolerance (76). Mechanistic studies further indicate that carrageenan may interfere with insulin receptor binding and suppress phosphoinositide 3-kinase/protein kinase B pathway (PI3K/Akt) activation, thereby impairing insulin signal transduction (77). Prospective cohort data have additionally linked long-term consumption of several common emulsifiers to an elevated risk of T2DM (78, 79). Collectively, available evidence suggests that emulsifiers may promote obesity, insulin resistance, and T2DM, although the precise underlying mechanisms warrant further investigation.

Artificial sweeteners are non-nutritive additives commonly used in UPFs to provide sweetness without increasing caloric intake. Compounds such as aspartame, sucralose, saccharin, and acesulfame-K may contribute to cardiometabolic injury through multiple mechanisms, including modulation of gut microbiota, glucose metabolism, insulin signaling, and vascular inflammation. Artificial sweeteners have been shown to shift gut microbial composition toward an obesity-associated phenotype and to induce chronic low-grade inflammation, thereby further promoting insulin resistance and obesity (80). Aspartame may additionally activate intestinal sweet taste receptors and vagal pathways to induce aberrant insulin secretion, establishing a state of sustained hyperinsulinemia that exacerbates systemic insulin resistance (81). Furthermore, aspartame may act directly on vascular endothelial cells, upregulating membrane-bound chemokine CX3CL1 expression and promoting the recruitment and M1 pro-inflammatory polarization of CX3CR1-positive monocytes and macrophages at the vessel wall, thereby amplifying local inflammatory responses and accelerating atherosclerosis progression (81). Multiple prospective studies have found that artificial sweetener intake is associated with increased risks of overall CVD, heart failure, and T2DM, with particularly pronounced associations observed for cerebrovascular disease risk (82, 83). Further analysis revealed that aspartame intake was specifically associated with an elevated risk of cerebrovascular events, while acesulfame potassium and sucralose were primarily linked to increased coronary heart disease risk (84). T2DM may partially mediate the association between artificial sweetener consumption and CVD, suggesting that glucose metabolic dysregulation represents an important intermediate mechanism in artificial sweetener-promoted cardiovascular injury (82). Overall, the long-term cardiometabolic effects of artificial sweeteners require further clarification.

Preservatives, in addition to extending food shelf life, have increasingly been implicated in cardiometabolic dysregulation. Among the most studied are nitrites, nitrates, and parabens. Notably, the biological effects of nitrates and nitrites differ markedly by source. Dietary nitrates naturally present in dark green leafy vegetables enhance nitric oxide bioavailability via the nitrate–nitrite–nitric oxide pathway, improving endothelial function, promoting vasodilation, and attenuating oxidative stress, with some evidence suggesting protective effects against obesity, T2DM, hypertension, and metabolic syndrome (85–90). In contrast, nitrite exposure from food additives, particularly sodium nitrite in processed meats, may exert opposing effects. A prospective cohort study associated higher intake of additive-derived nitrites with an approximately 19% higher risk of hypertension, whereas nitrates and nitrites from natural food and water sources showed no comparable association. These findings suggest that the observed relationship may vary according to the source of exposure (91). Parabens represent another class of preservatives that have attracted considerable research attention. These compounds possess weak estrogenic activity and are classified as endocrine-disrupting chemicals, potentially contributing to metabolic abnormalities through effects on lipid metabolism, inflammatory responses, and insulin signal transduction. Elevated levels of methylparaben and propylparaben have been observed in overweight and obese women. The underlying mechanism may involve paraben-mediated activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma, promoting adipocyte differentiation and lipid accumulation while impairing glucose uptake and insulin sensitivity (92). Additional studies have reported associations between methylparaben, propylparaben, and butylparaben exposure and insulin levels and insulin resistance, although heterogeneity and non-linear effects across compounds have been noted (93). Parabens may also induce chronic low-grade inflammation through modulation of inflammatory mediators including interleukin-1β, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor alpha, and transforming growth factor beta (93). Furthermore, elevated urinary levels of ethylparaben, propylparaben, and total parabens have been associated with increased hypertension risk, with ESR1 gene polymorphisms potentially modifying this association (94); however, the overall evidence base remains limited, and the significance of parabens as a meaningful contributor to UPF-related cardiometabolic risk requires further investigation. Available evidence suggests possible associations between certain preservatives and obesity, insulin resistance, and hypertension, but remains limited and heterogeneous.

4.3 Limitations

This study systematically mapped the research progress, hotspots, and trends in the field of UPF intake and cardiometabolic health using the Web of Science and Scopus databases, providing an important reference for deepening understanding of this field and guiding future research directions. Nevertheless, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the data sources were restricted to these two databases; although Web of Science is widely recognized as an ideal tool for bibliometric analysis owing to its rigorous quality standards, the exclusion of other databases may have resulted in the omission of some relevant publications. Second, the inclusion of only English-language articles and review articles may have introduced language bias and document-type selection bias. Studies from non-English-speaking countries or regions, as well as conference papers, dissertations, book chapters, and institutional reports, may therefore have been excluded. Third, WoSCC and Scopus differ in journal coverage, data fields, cited-reference formats, and citation-counting rules. To avoid metadata inconsistencies or the loss of critical information during database merging, the two databases were analyzed separately; however, this approach limited the direct integration of their results. Fourth, although the literature search was completed on March 19, 2026, some publications from 2025 may not yet have been fully included or indexed in WoSCC or Scopus. Consequently, publication output for 2025 may have been underestimated, and keyword frequencies and trend topics for the most recent year may not yet be stable. Fifth, the analytical approaches employed in CiteSpace and VOSviewer cannot fully substitute for systematic literature retrieval, and bibliometric methods are subject to inherent limitations, including the inability to assess the quality of individual studies and the time-dependent nature of citation metrics, whereby recently published articles may be underrepresented in citation counts due to insufficient accumulation time. Sixth, the results of keyword clustering and trend identification may be influenced by keyword standardization rules, minimum occurrence thresholds, and software parameter settings; therefore, the identified research hotspots and thematic boundaries are method-dependent to some extent. Overall, the findings of this study are primarily intended to describe the general research structure, major hotspots, and potential future directions in the field of UPF intake and cardiometabolic health. Further high-quality studies conducted by a broader range of research teams are needed to elucidate the mechanisms underlying the association between UPFs and cardiometabolic health, establish causal relationships, and develop targeted intervention strategies.

5 Conclusion

Using records retrieved from the WoSCC and Scopus databases, this study systematically mapped the scholarly literature concerning UPF intake and cardiometabolic health over the decade from 2015 to 2025 through bibliometric methods. The findings reveal a sustained and rapid growth in research output over the past decade, with Brazil and the United States dominating global publication volume and institutional contribution. The University of São Paulo, in particular, has played a central and leading role in the global academic network. The convergence of high publication output and high citation counts in core journals such as Nutrients and Public Health Nutrition underscores their dual role in both establishing the knowledge base and driving the frontier development of this field.

By synthesizing evidence from burst detection, co-occurrence network analysis, and longitudinal thematic mapping, three dominant areas of research focus were delineated. Available epidemiological and interventional evidence indicates that higher UPF intake is associated with heightened susceptibility to obesity, T2DM, dyslipidemia, hypertension, cardiovascular events, and all-cause mortality, with detrimental effects observed across multiple biological targets and pathways. Second, children and adolescents represent a high-risk population for UPF exposure; early consumption may exert lasting adverse effects on adult cardiometabolic health by promoting obesity, inducing early disturbances in glucose and lipid metabolism, and reinforcing unhealthy dietary habits. Third, food additives, including emulsifiers, artificial sweeteners, and nitrite-containing preservatives, may contribute to cardiometabolic dysregulation through multiple mechanisms, including gut microbiota imbalance, impaired insulin signaling, chronic inflammation, and endothelial dysfunction, while food matrix disruption-induced rapid nutrient absorption and attenuated satiety signaling also represent important pathogenic mechanisms.

The knowledge map constructed in this study provides a reference framework for researchers, clinicians, and public health practitioners in this field. Future research should focus on establishing causal evidence through high-quality prospective studies and intervention trials, systematically comparing the differential effects of specific UPF subgroups and individual food additives, and developing mechanism-based targeted dietary intervention strategies, with the overarching goal of providing a scientific foundation for reducing the global burden of CMDs.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that Generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2026.1916253/full#supplementary-material

Full search strategies for the Web of Science Core Collection and Scopus databases. Supplementary material at the source

Annual publication output of research on ultra-processed food intake and cardiometabolic health in the Scopus database, 2015–2025. Supplementary material at the source

Distribution of the top 20 corresponding-author countries in the Scopus dataset. Supplementary material at the source

Keyword co-occurrence network of publications based on the Scopus dataset. Supplementary material at the source

Complete list of keywords and corresponding cluster assignments derived from the Scopus keyword co-occurrence analysis. Supplementary material at the source

Footnotes

Edited by: Gabriel Komla Adzika, University of Pennsylvania, United States

Reviewed by: Bo Zhang, Guilin Medical University, China

Yuanyuan Yan, The Third People's Hospital of Hainan Province, China

Footnotes

UPF(s), Ultra-processed food(s); CMD(s), Cardiometabolic disease(s); CVD, Cardiovascular disease; T2DM, Type 2 diabetes mellitus; RCT, Randomized controlled trial; WoSCC, Web of Science Core Collection; IF, Impact factor.

Statements

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Funding

The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 82274494 and 82505715), the Liaoning Province Science and Technology Program Project-Industrial Major Project (Grant No. 2020JH1/10100022) and the National TCM Advantageous Specialty Construction Project (Cardiovascular Medicine) of the National Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine [Notice No. 90, 2024].

Data availability

Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found at: Web of Science: https://www.webofscience.com/wos/; Scopus: https://www.elsevier.com/products/scopus.

Author contributions

TC: Writing – review & editing, Formal analysis, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Visualization, Conceptualization. PN: Conceptualization, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Methodology, Data curation. ML: Visualization, Data curation, Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization. HM: Data curation, Validation, Visualization, Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing. JD: Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Validation. YY: Validation, Writing – review & editing, Supervision. RY: Validation, Writing – review & editing, Supervision.

References

  1. 1. Lawrence MA, Baker PI. Ultra-processed food and adverse health outcomes. BMJ. (2019) 365: l2289. doi:, doi:10.1136/bmj.l2289
  2. 2. Monteiro CA. Nutrition and health. The issue is not food, nor nutrients, so much as processing. Public Health Nutr. (2009) 12: 729 – 31. doi: doi:10.1017/S1368980009005291
  3. 3. Batal M, Johnson-Down L, Moubarac J-C, Ing A, Fediuk K, Sadik T. Quantifying associations of the dietary share of ultra-processed foods with overall diet quality in first nations peoples in the Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba and Ontario. Public Health Nutr. (2018) 21: 103 – 13. doi:, doi:10.1017/S1368980017001677
  4. 4. Chen X, Zhang Z, Yang H, Qiu P, Wang H, Wang F. Consumption of ultra-processed foods and health outcomes: a systematic review of epidemiological studies. Nutr J. (2020) 19: 86. doi:, doi:10.1186/s12937-020-00604-1
  5. 5. Fang Z, Rossato SL, Hang D, Khandpur N, Wang K, Lo C-H. Association of ultra-processed food consumption with all cause and cause specific mortality: population based cohort study. BMJ. (2024): e078476. doi:, doi:10.1136/bmj-2023-078476
  6. 6. Srour B, Kordahi MC, Bonazzi E, Deschasaux-Tanguy M, Touvier M, Chassaing B. Ultra-processed foods and human health: from epidemiological evidence to mechanistic insights. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. (2022) 7: 1128 – 40. doi:, doi:10.1016/S2468-1253(22)00169-8
  7. 7. Steele EM, O’Connor LE, Juul F, Khandpur N, Galastri Baraldi L, Monteiro CA. Identifying and estimating Ultraprocessed food intake in the US NHANES according to the Nova classification system of food processing. J Nutr. (2023) 153: 225 – 41. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.tjnut.2022.09.001
  8. 8. Machado PP, Steele EM, Levy RB, Sui Z, Rangan A, Woods J. Ultra-processed foods and recommended intake levels of nutrients linked to non-communicable diseases in Australia: evidence from a nationally representative cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. (2019) 9: e029544. doi:, doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029544
  9. 9. Monteiro CA, Cannon G, Lawrence M, da Costa Louza ML, Machado PP. Ultra-Processed Foods, diet Quality, and Health using the NOVA Classification system. Rome: FAO (2019).
  10. 10. Jin Y, Liang J, Hong C, Liang R, Luo Y. Cardiometabolic multimorbidity, lifestyle behaviours, and cognitive function: a multicohort study. Lancet Healthy Longev. (2023) 4: e265 – 73. doi:, doi:10.1016/S2666-7568(23)00054-5
  11. 11. Rubino F, Batterham RL, Koch M, Mingrone G, Le Roux CW, Farooqi IS. Lancet diabetes & endocrinology commission on the definition and diagnosis of clinical obesity. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. (2023) 11: 226 – 8. doi: doi:10.1016/S2213-8587(23)00058-X
  12. 12. Eckel RH, Grundy SM, Zimmet PZ. The metabolic syndrome. Lancet. (2005) 365: 1415 – 28. doi: doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66378-7
  13. 13. Oishi Y, Manabe I. Organ system crosstalk in Cardiometabolic disease in the age of multimorbidity. Front Cardiovasc Med. (2020) 7: 64. doi:, doi:10.3389/fcvm.2020.00064
  14. 14. Neeland IJ, Ross R, Després J-P, Matsuzawa Y, Yamashita S, Shai I. Visceral and ectopic fat, atherosclerosis, and cardiometabolic disease: a position statement. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. (2019) 7: 715 – 25. doi:, doi:10.1016/S2213-8587(19)30084-1
  15. 15. Devesa A, Fuster V, Vazirani R, García-Lunar I, Oliva B, España S. Cardiac insulin resistance in subjects with metabolic syndrome traits and early subclinical atherosclerosis. Diabetes Care. (2023) 46: 2050 – 7. doi:, doi:10.2337/dc23-0871
  16. 16. Li J, Lei L, Wang W, Ding W, Yu Y, Pu B. Social risk profile and cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome in US adults. J Am Heart Assoc. (2024) 13: e034996. doi:, doi:10.1161/JAHA.124.034996
  17. 17. Stark BA, DeCleene NK, Desai EC, Hsu JM, Johnson CO, Lara-Castor L. Global, regional, and national burden of cardiovascular diseases and risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2023. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2025) 86: 2167 – 243. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2025.08.015
  18. 18. Zhao Y, Zhuang Z, Li Y, Xiao W, Song Z, Huang N. Elevated blood remnant cholesterol and triglycerides are causally related to the risks of cardiometabolic multimorbidity. Nat Commun. (2024) 15: 2451. doi:, doi:10.1038/s41467-024-46686-x
  19. 19. Juul F, Deierlein AL, Vaidean G, Quatromoni PA, Parekh N. Ultra-processed foods and Cardiometabolic health outcomes: from evidence to practice. Curr Atheroscler Rep. (2022) 24: 849 – 60. doi:, doi:10.1007/s11883-022-01061-3
  20. 20. Juul F, Vaidean G, Parekh N. Ultra-processed foods and cardiovascular diseases: potential mechanisms of action. Adv Nutr. (2021) 12: 1673 – 80. doi:, doi:10.1093/advances/nmab049
  21. 21. Gratão LHA, Silva TPRD, Rocha LL, Jardim MZ, Oliveira TRPRD, Cunha CDF. Common mental disorders in Brazilian adolescents: association with school characteristics, consumption of ultra-processed foods and waist-to-height ratio. Cad Saude Publica. (2024) 40: e00068423. doi:, doi:10.1590/0102-311xen068423
  22. 22. Mashki SF, De Oliveira MH, Dos S Pereira DB, Gregolin GC, Conde WL. Association between ultraprocessed food consumption and obesity in US adults: an analysis of NHANES 2009-2018. Arch Latinoam Nutr. (2023) 73: 113 – 21. doi: doi:10.37527/2023.73.2.003
  23. 23. Liu J, Steele EM, Li Y, Yi SS, Monteiro CA, Mozaffarian D. Consumption of ultraprocessed foods and body fat distribution among U.S. adults. Am J Prev Med. (2023) 65: 427 – 38. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2023.03.012
  24. 24. Juul F, Vaidean G, Lin Y, Deierlein AL, Parekh N. Ultra-processed foods and incident cardiovascular disease in the Framingham offspring study. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2021) 77: 1520 – 31. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2021.01.047
  25. 25. Manoj Kumar L, George RJ, Anisha PS. Bibliometric analysis for medical research. Indian J Psychol Med. (2023) 45: 277 – 82. doi: doi:10.1177/02537176221103617
  26. 26. Donthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D, Pandey N, Lim WM. How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: an overview and guidelines. J Bus Res. (2021) 133: 285 – 96. doi: doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
  27. 27. Mendoza K, Smith-Warner SA, Rossato SL, Khandpur N, Manson JE, Qi L. Ultra-processed foods and cardiovascular disease: analysis of three large US prospective cohorts and a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Lancet Reg Health Am. (2024) 37: 100859. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.lana.2024.100859
  28. 28. Wang L, Steele EM, Du M, Luo H, Zhang X, Mozaffarian D. Association between ultra-processed food consumption and mortality among US adults: prospective cohort study of the National Health and nutrition examination survey, 2003-2018. J Acad Nutr Diet. (2025) 125: 875 – 887.e7. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.jand.2024.11.014
  29. 29. Nilson EAF, Delpino FM, Batis C, Machado PP, Moubarac J-C, Cediel G. Premature mortality attributable to ultraprocessed food consumption in 8 countries. Am J Prev Med. (2025) 68: 1091 – 9. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2025.02.018
  30. 30. Mambrini SP, Menichetti F, Ravella S, Pellizzari M, De Amicis R, Foppiani A. Ultra-processed food consumption and incidence of obesity and cardiometabolic risk factors in adults: a systematic review of prospective studies. Nutrients. (2023) 15: 2583. doi:, doi:10.3390/nu15112583
  31. 31. Tan L, Hwang SB, Shin S. The longitudinal effect of ultra-processed food on the development of dyslipidemia/obesity as assessed by the NOVA system and food compass score. Mol Nutr Food Res. (2023) 67: 2300003. doi:, doi:10.1002/mnfr.202300003
  32. 32. Mendonça RDD, Pimenta AM, Gea A, De La Fuente-Arrillaga C, Martinez-Gonzalez MA, Lopes ACS. Ultraprocessed food consumption and risk of overweight and obesity: the University of Navarra Follow-up (SUN) cohort study. Am J Clin Nutr. (2016) 104: 1433 – 40. doi:, doi:10.3945/ajcn.116.135004
  33. 33. Moradi S, Entezari MH, Mohammadi H, Jayedi A, Lazaridi A-V, Kermani MAH. Ultra-processed food consumption and adult obesity risk: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. (2023) 63: 249 – 60. doi:, doi:10.1080/10408398.2021.1946005
  34. 34. Hall KD, Ayuketah A, Brychta R, Cai H, Cassimatis T, Chen KY. Ultra-processed diets cause excess calorie intake and weight gain: an inpatient randomized controlled trial of ad libitum food intake. Cell Metab. (2019) 30: 67 – 77.e3. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.cmet.2019.05.008
  35. 35. Srour B, Fezeu LK, Kesse-Guyot E, Allès B, Debras C, Druesne-Pecollo N. Ultraprocessed food consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes among participants of the NutriNet-santé prospective cohort. JAMA Intern Med. (2020) 180: 283 – 91. doi:, doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.5942
  36. 36. Chen Z, Khandpur N, Desjardins C, Wang L, Monteiro CA, Rossato SL. Ultra-processed food consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: three large prospective U.S. cohort studies. Diabetes Care. (2023) 46: 1335 – 44. doi:, doi:10.2337/dc22-1993
  37. 37. Minari TP, De Rosso VV, Manzano CF, Humsi MJ, Yugar LBT, Sedenho-Prado LG. Correlation of the Mediterranean–dietary approaches to stop hypertension diet vs. ultra-processed diet with health outcomes in type 2 diabetes and hypertension: new insights from a 12-month interventional study. J Hypertens. (2025) 43: 1622 – 42. doi: doi:10.1097/HJH.0000000000004061
  38. 38. Donat-Vargas C, Sandoval-Insausti H, Rey-García J, Moreno-Franco B, Åkesson A, Banegas JR. High consumption of ultra-processed food is associated with incident dyslipidemia: a prospective study of older adults. J Nutr. (2021) 151: 2390 – 8. doi: doi:10.1093/jn/nxab118
  39. 39. Mendonça RDD, Lopes ACS, Pimenta AM, Gea A, Martinez-Gonzalez MA, Bes-Rastrollo M. Ultra-processed food consumption and the incidence of hypertension in a Mediterranean cohort: the Seguimiento Universidad de Navarra project. Am J Hypertens. (2017) 30: 358 – 66. doi:, doi:10.1093/ajh/hpw137
  40. 40. Oladele CR, Khandpur N, Johnson S, Yuan Y, Wambugu V, Plante TB. Ultra-processed food consumption and hypertension risk in the REGARDS cohort study. Hypertension. (2024) 81: 2520 – 8. doi:, doi:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.123.22341
  41. 41. He FJ, Tan M, Ma Y, MacGregor GA. Salt reduction to prevent hypertension and cardiovascular disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2020) 75: 632 – 47. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2019.11.055
  42. 42. Wang J, Chen T, Zhu W, Shi Z, Yan X, Lei Z. Ultra-processed food, genetic risk, and the risk of cardiometabolic diseases and cardiometabolic multimorbidity: A prospective study. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. (2024) 34: 2799 – 806. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.numecd.2024.09.011
  43. 43. Yuan L, Hu H, Li T, Zhang J, Feng Y, Yang X. Dose–response meta-analysis of ultra-processed food with the risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality: evidence from prospective cohort studies. Food Funct. (2023) 14: 2586 – 96. doi:, doi:10.1039/D2FO02628G
  44. 44. You J, Hou J, Xie X, Xu R. Consumption of ultra-processed foods raises the possibility of cardiovascular disease – A meta-analysis. Nutr Hosp. (2024) 42: 117 – 30. doi:, doi:10.20960/nh.05325
  45. 45. Nilson EAF, Ferrari G, Louzada MLC, Levy RB, Monteiro CA, Rezende LFM. Premature deaths attributable to the consumption of ultraprocessed foods in Brazil. Am J Prev Med. (2023) 64: 129 – 36. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2022.08.013
  46. 46. Sato PDM, Leite FHM, Khandpur N, Martins APB, Mais LA. “I like the one with minions”: the influence of marketing on packages of ultra-processed snacks on children’s food choices. Front Nutr. (2022) 9: 920225. doi: doi:10.3389/fnut.2022.920225
  47. 47. Monteiro CA, Cannon G, Levy RB, Moubarac J-C, Louzada ML, Rauber F. Ultra-processed foods: what they are and how to identify them. Public Health Nutr. (2019) 22: 936 – 41. doi:, doi:10.1017/S1368980018003762
  48. 48. Davidou S, Frank K, Christodoulou A, Fardet A. Organic food retailing: to what extent are foods processed and do they contain markers of ultra-processing? Int J Food Sci Nutr. (2022) 73: 172 – 83. doi:, doi:10.1080/09637486.2021.1966395
  49. 49. Longo-Silva G, Silveira JAC, Menezes RCED, Toloni MHDA. Age at introduction of ultra-processed food among preschool children attending day-care centers. J Pediatr. (2017) 93: 508 – 16. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.jped.2016.11.015
  50. 50. Wang L., Martínez Steele E., Du M., Pomeranz J. L., O’Connor L. E., Herrick K. A. Trends in consumption of ultraprocessed foods among US youths aged 2-19 years, 1999-2018. JAMA (2021) 326: 519. doi:, 530, doi:10.1001/jama.2021.10238
  51. 51. Costa CS, Rauber F, Leffa PS, Sangalli CN, Campagnolo PDB, Vitolo MR. Ultra-processed food consumption and its effects on anthropometric and glucose profile: A longitudinal study during childhood. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. (2019) 29: 177 – 84. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.numecd.2018.11.003
  52. 52. Khoury N, Martínez MÁ, Garcidueñas-Fimbres TE, Pastor-Villaescusa B, Leis R, De Las Heras-Delgado S. Ultraprocessed food consumption and cardiometabolic risk factors in children. JAMA Netw Open. (2024) 7: e2411852. doi:, doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.11852
  53. 53. Luque V, Escribano J, Closa-Monasterolo R, Zaragoza-Jordana M, Ferré N, Grote V. Unhealthy dietary patterns established in infancy track to mid-childhood: the EU childhood obesity project. J Nutr. (2018) 148: 752 – 9. doi:, doi:10.1093/jn/nxy025
  54. 54. Vedovato GM, Vilela S, Severo M, Rodrigues S, Lopes C, Oliveira A. Ultra-processed food consumption, appetitive traits and BMI in children: a prospective study. Br J Nutr. (2021) 125: 1427 – 36. doi:, doi:10.1017/S0007114520003712
  55. 55. Teo PS, Lim AJ, Goh AT, Janani R, Choy JYM, McCrickerd K. Texture-based differences in eating rate influence energy intake for minimally processed and ultra-processed meals. Am J Clin Nutr. (2022) 116: 244 – 54. doi:, doi:10.1093/ajcn/nqac068
  56. 56. Forde CG, Mars M, De Graaf K. Ultra-processing or oral processing? A role for energy density and eating rate in moderating energy intake from processed foods. Curr Dev Nutr. (2020) 4: nzaa019. doi:, doi:10.1093/cdn/nzaa019
  57. 57. Calcaterra V, Cena H, Rossi V, Santero S, Bianchi A, Zuccotti G. Ultra-processed food, reward system and childhood obesity. Children. (2023) 10: 804. doi:, doi:10.3390/children10050804
  58. 58. LaFata EM, Allison KC, Audrain-McGovern J, Forman EM. Ultra-processed food addiction: A research update. Curr Obes Rep. (2024) 13: 214 – 23. doi:, doi:10.1007/s13679-024-00569-w
  59. 59. Leffa PS, Hoffman DJ, Rauber F, Sangalli CN, Valmórbida JL, Vitolo MR. Longitudinal associations between ultra-processed foods and blood lipids in childhood. Br J Nutr. (2020) 124: 341 – 8. doi:, doi:10.1017/S0007114520001233
  60. 60. Aguilera JM. The food matrix: implications in processing, nutrition and health. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. (2019) 59: 3612 – 29. doi:, doi:10.1080/10408398.2018.1502743
  61. 61. Holland C, Ryden P, Edwards CH, Grundy MM-L. Plant cell walls: impact on nutrient bioaccessibility and digestibility. Foods. (2020) 9: 201. doi:, doi:10.3390/foods9020201
  62. 62. Hu X, Zhang G, Hamaker BR, Miao M. The contribution of intact structure and food processing to functionality of plant cell wall-derived dietary fiber. Food Hydrocoll. (2022) 127: 107511. doi: doi:10.1016/j.foodhyd.2022.107511
  63. 63. Grundy MM-L, Edwards CH, Mackie AR, Gidley MJ, Butterworth PJ, Ellis PR. Re-evaluation of the mechanisms of dietary fibre and implications for macronutrient bioaccessibility, digestion and postprandial metabolism. Br J Nutr. (2016) 116: 816 – 33. doi:, doi:10.1017/S0007114516002610
  64. 64. Capuano E, Janssen AEM. Food matrix and macronutrient digestion. Annu Rev Food Sci Technol. (2021) 12: 193 – 212. doi:, doi:10.1146/annurev-food-032519-051646
  65. 65. Bolhuis DP, Forde CG. Application of food texture to moderate oral processing behaviors and energy intake. Trends Food Sci Technol. (2020) 106: 445 – 56. doi: doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2020.10.021
  66. 66. Slyper A. Oral processing, satiation and obesity: overview and hypotheses. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. (2021) 14: 3399 – 415. doi:, doi:10.2147/DMSO.S314379
  67. 67. Campbell CL, Wagoner TB, Foegeding EA. Designing foods for satiety: the roles of food structure and oral processing in satiation and satiety. Food Struct. (2017) 13: 1 – 12. doi: doi:10.1016/j.foostr.2016.08.002
  68. 68. Lasschuijt M, Mars M, De Graaf C, Smeets PA. How oro-sensory exposure and eating rate affect satiation and associated endocrine responses—a randomized trial. Am J Clin Nutr. (2020) 111: 1137 – 49. doi:, doi:10.1093/ajcn/nqaa067
  69. 69. Argyrakopoulou G, Simati S, Dimitriadis G, Kokkinos A. How important is eating rate in the physiological response to food intake, control of body weight, and Glycemia? Nutrients. (2020) 12: 1734. doi:, doi:10.3390/nu12061734
  70. 70. Kokkinos A, Le Roux CW, Alexiadou K, Tentolouris N, Vincent RP, Kyriaki D. Eating slowly increases the postprandial response of the anorexigenic gut hormones, peptide YY and glucagon-like peptide-1. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. (2010) 95: 333 – 7. doi:, doi:10.1210/jc.2009-1018
  71. 71. Chassaing B, Compher C, Bonhomme B, Liu Q, Tian Y, Walters W. Randomized controlled-feeding study of dietary emulsifier Carboxymethylcellulose reveals detrimental impacts on the gut microbiota and metabolome. Gastroenterology. (2022) 162: 743 – 56. doi:, doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2021.11.006
  72. 72. Tang Q, Wang C, Jin G, Li Y, Hou H, Wang X. Early life dietary emulsifier exposure predisposes the offspring to obesity through gut microbiota-FXR axis. Food Res Int. (2022) 162: 111921. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2022.111921
  73. 73. Wagner R, Buettner J, Heni M, Fritsche L, Kullmann S, Wagmüller M. Carrageenan and insulin resistance in humans: a randomised double-blind cross-over trial. BMC Med. (2024) 22: 558. doi:, doi:10.1186/s12916-024-03771-8
  74. 74. Naimi S, Viennois E, Gewirtz AT, Chassaing B. Direct impact of commonly used dietary emulsifiers on human gut microbiota. Microbiome. (2021) 9: 66. doi:, doi:10.1186/s40168-020-00996-6
  75. 75. Chassaing B, Van De Wiele T, De Bodt J, Marzorati M, Gewirtz AT. Dietary emulsifiers directly alter human microbiota composition and gene expression ex vivo potentiating intestinal inflammation. Gut. (2017) 66: 1414 – 27. doi:, doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2016-313099
  76. 76. Feferman L, Bhattacharyya S, Oates E, Haggerty N, Wang T, Varady K. Carrageenan-free diet shows improved glucose tolerance and insulin signaling in prediabetes: A randomized, pilot clinical trial. J Diabetes Res. (2020) 2020: 1 – 16. doi:, doi:10.1155/2020/8267980
  77. 77. Zhou J, Wang F, Chen J, Yang R, Chen Y, Gu D. Long-term kappa-carrageenan consumption leads to moderate metabolic disorder by blocking insulin binding. Pharmacol Res. (2021) 165: 105417. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.phrs.2020.105417
  78. 78. Payen De La Garanderie M, Hasenbohler A, Dechamp N, Javaux G, Szabo De Edelenyi F, Agaësse C. Food additive mixtures and type 2 diabetes incidence: results from the NutriNet-santé prospective cohort. PLoS Med. (2025) 22: e1004570. doi:, doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1004570
  79. 79. Salame C, Javaux G, Sellem L, Viennois E, De Edelenyi FS, Agaësse C. Food additive emulsifiers and the risk of type 2 diabetes: analysis of data from the NutriNet-santé prospective cohort study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. (2024) 12: 339 – 49. doi:, doi:10.1016/S2213-8587(24)00086-X
  80. 80. Liauchonak I, Qorri B, Dawoud F, Riat Y, Szewczuk MR. Non-nutritive sweeteners and their implications on the development of metabolic syndrome. Nutrients. (2019) 11: 644. doi:, doi:10.3390/nu11030644
  81. 81. Wu W, Sui W, Chen S, Guo Z, Jing X, Wang X. Sweetener aspartame aggravates atherosclerosis through insulin-triggered inflammation. Cell Metab. (2025) 37: 1075 – 1088.e7. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.cmet.2025.01.006
  82. 82. Sun T, Yang J, Lei F, Huang X, Liu W, Zhang X. Artificial sweeteners and risk of incident cardiovascular disease and mortality: evidence from UK biobank. Cardiovasc Diabetol. (2024) 23: 233. doi:, doi:10.1186/s12933-024-02333-9
  83. 83. Debras C, Deschasaux-Tanguy M, Chazelas E, Sellem L, Druesne-Pecollo N, Esseddik Y. Artificial sweeteners and risk of type 2 diabetes in the prospective NutriNet-santé cohort. Diabetes Care. (2023) 46: 1681 – 90. doi:, doi:10.2337/dc23-0206
  84. 84. Debras C, Chazelas E, Sellem L, Porcher R, Druesne-Pecollo N, Esseddik Y. Artificial sweeteners and risk of cardiovascular diseases: results from the prospective NutriNet-santé cohort. BMJ. (2022) 378: e071204. doi:, doi:10.1136/bmj-2022-071204
  85. 85. Barbosa PO, Tanus-Santos JE, Cavalli RDC, Bengtsson T, Montenegro MF, Sandrim VC. The nitrate-nitrite-nitric oxide pathway: potential role in mitigating oxidative stress in hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Nutrients. (2024) 16: 1475. doi:, doi:10.3390/nu16101475
  86. 86. Sindler AL, Fleenor BS, Calvert JW, Marshall KD, Zigler ML, Lefer DJ. Nitrite supplementation reverses vascular endothelial dysfunction and large elastic artery stiffness with aging: sodium nitrite and vascular dysfunction with aging. Aging Cell. (2011) 10: 429 – 37. doi:, doi:10.1111/j.1474-9726.2011.00679.x
  87. 87. Gao X, Yang T, Liu M, Peleli M, Zollbrecht C, Weitzberg E. NADPH oxidase in the renal microvasculature is a primary target for blood pressure–lowering effects by inorganic nitrate and nitrite. Hypertension. (2015) 65: 161 – 70. doi:, doi:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.114.04222
  88. 88. McNally B, Griffin JL, Roberts LD. Dietary inorganic nitrate: from villain to hero in metabolic disease? Mol Nutr Food Res. (2016) 60: 67 – 78. doi:, doi:10.1002/mnfr.201500153
  89. 89. Webb AJ, Patel N, Loukogeorgakis S, Okorie M, Aboud Z, Misra S. Acute blood pressure lowering, Vasoprotective, and antiplatelet properties of dietary nitrate via bioconversion to nitrite. Hypertension. (2008) 51: 784 – 90. doi:, doi:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.107.103523
  90. 90. Amaral JH, Ferreira GC, Pinheiro LC, Montenegro MF, Tanus-Santos JE. Consistent antioxidant and antihypertensive effects of oral sodium nitrite in DOCA-salt hypertension. Redox Biol. (2015) 5: 340 – 6. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.redox.2015.06.009
  91. 91. Srour B, Chazelas E, Fezeu LK, Javaux G, Pierre F, Huybrechts I. Nitrites, nitrates, and cardiovascular outcomes: are we living “La vie en rose” with pink processed meats? J Am Heart Assoc. (2022) 11: e027627. doi:, doi:10.1161/JAHA.122.027627
  92. 92. Kolatorova L, Sramkova M, Vitku J, Vcelak J, Lischkova O, Starka L. Parabens and their relation to obesity. Physiol Res. (2018) 67: S465 – 72. doi:, doi:10.33549/physiolres.934004
  93. 93. Ramalho A, Vale A, Carvalho F, Fernandes E, Freitas M. Parabens exposure and its impact on diabesity: a review. Toxicology. (2025) 515: 154125. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.tox.2025.154125
  94. 94. Zhou S, Lu H, Zhang X, Shi X, Jiang S, Wang L. Paraben exposures and their interactions with ESR1/2 genetic polymorphisms on hypertension. Environ Res. (2022) 213: 113651. doi:, doi:10.1016/j.envres.2022.113651

Citation

Chen, T., et al. (2026). Global research landscape and emerging frontiers of ultra-processed food intake and cardiometabolic health: a bibliometric and knowledge-mapping analysis (2015–2025). Frontiers in Nutrition, Volume 13. https://doi.org/
Received
Accepted
Published
Volume
13 - 2026

Copyright

Copyright © 2026 Chen, Ni, Li, Ma, Dai, Yu and Yu.

License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

*Correspondence: You Yu; Rui Yu

Article metrics

Views
0
Downloads
0
Citations
0
Shares
0