CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 358Biochemical Analysis and Sensing TechniquesDiet, Metabolism, and DiseaseRegulation of Appetite and Obesity

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 211 of the 211 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Does low-energy sweetener consumption affect energy intake and body weight? A systematic review, including meta-analyses, of the evidence from human and animal studies

Open access
Rogers, P J, Hogenkamp, P S, de Graaf, C, Higgs, S, Lluch, A, Ness, A R, Penfold, C, Perry, R, Putz, P, Yeomans, M R, Mela, D J·2016·International Journal of Obesity
DOI 10.1038/ijo.2015.177PMC PMC4786736
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

By reducing energy density, low-energy sweeteners (LES) might be expected to reduce energy intake (EI) and body weight (BW). To assess the totality of the evidence testing the null hypothesis that LES exposure (versus sugars or unsweetened alternatives) has no effect on EI or BW, we conducted a systematic review of relevant studies in animals and humans consuming LES with ad libitum access to food energy. In 62 of 90 animal studies exposure to LES did not affect or decreased BW. Of 28 reporting increased BW, 19 compared LES with glucose exposure using a specific 'learning' paradigm. Twelve prospective cohort studies in humans reported inconsistent associations between LES use and body mass index (-0.002 kg m(-)(2) per year, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.009 to 0.005). Meta-analysis of short-term randomized controlled trials (129 comparisons) showed reduced total EI for LES versus sugar-sweetened food or beverage consumption before an ad libitum meal (-94 kcal, 95% CI -122 to -66), with no difference versus water (-2 kcal, 95% CI -30 to 26). This was consistent with EI results from sustained intervention randomized controlled trials (10 comparisons). Meta-analysis of sustained intervention randomized controlled trials (4 weeks to 40 months) showed that consumption of LES versus sugar led to relatively reduced BW (nine comparisons; -1.35 kg, 95% CI -2.28 to -0.42), and a similar relative reduction in BW versus water (three comparisons; -1.24 kg, 95% CI -2.22 to -0.26). Most animal studies did not mimic LES consumption by humans, and reverse causation may influence the results of prospective cohort studies. The preponderance of evidence from all human randomized controlled trials indicates that LES do not increase EI or BW, whether compared with caloric or non-caloric (for example, water) control conditions. Overall, the balance of evidence indicates that use of LES in place of sugar, in children and adults, leads to reduced EI and BW, and possibly also when compared with water.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/ijo.2015.177

Cites

211 of 211 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 210 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Reis TA, Goulart P, de Oliveira RME, Oliveira Ld, de Abreu PS, Azevedo Ad . Metabolic parameters of wistar rats subjected to diet supplemented with stevia and sugar. Semina: Ciéncias Agrarias (Londrina) 2011; 32: 1477–1488.
  2. EFSA. EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to food. Scientific opinion on the safety of steviol glycosides for the proposed uses as a food additive. EFSA J 2010; 8: 1–84.
  3. Carvalho P, Sousa M, Barros R, Padrao P, Moreira P, Teixeira V . Impact of morning ingestion of sugary and sweetened beverages on energy and fluid intake throughout day. Ann Nutr Metab 2013; 63: 1448–1449.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–358 of 358

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Rogers, P. J., Hogenkamp, P. S., de Graaf, C., Higgs, S., Lluch, A., Ness, A. R., Penfold, C., Perry, R., Putz, P., Yeomans, M. R., & Mela, D. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • Uppsala University (SE)
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
  • Danone (France) (FR)
  • University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • University of Sussex (GB)
  • Unilever Research and Development Vlaardingen (NL)
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Obesity
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2015-09-14
Volume
40
Issue
3
Pages
381-394
ISSN
  • 0307-0565 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5497
DOI
10.1038/ijo.2015.177
PMC
PMC4786736
OpenAlex
W2171131656
Cited by
358
References
210
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 46 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 2
FWCI
5.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal of Obesity (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0513-10083)
  • European Commission (607310)
  • University of Bristol
  • Wageningen University and Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Biochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diet, Metabolism, and Disease
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Regulation of Appetite and Obesity
Keywords
energy intake, body weight, body mass index, sugar-sweetened beverages, ad libitum feeding, energy density, weight gain, reverse causality, animal studies, prospective cohort, randomized controlled trials
MeSH terms
Animals, Body Weight, Energy Intake, Humans, Obesity, Sweetening Agents, Reproducibility of Results, Weight Gain, Body Mass Index, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Evidence-Based Medicine, Models, Animal, Non-Nutritive Sweeteners, Observational Studies as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review