Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked I-UPF-110 in-depth review

Ultra-processed food and inflammatory bowel disease: pooled data

Food Processing and Risk of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Overview

Narula N et al.. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023 · PMID 36731590 · DOI 10.1016/j.cgh.2023.01.012

Across five cohorts, high UPF intake was linked to 71% more Crohn's disease but not to ulcerative colitis.

Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

To pool cohorts on UPF and IBD.

How was the study done?

Meta-analysis of 5 cohorts.

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

Over 1 million people.

What was actually found?

Crohn's disease associated; ulcerative colitis not.

How large was the observed effect?

CD HR 1.71 (1.37-2.14).

What do the results mean in everyday life?

The link concerns Crohn's disease specifically.

What are the study's limitations?

Few cohorts; observational.

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Partly supports C-UPF-05.

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

Applicable.

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Cannot prove causation.

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Narula N et al.
Journal
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol
Year
2023
Identifier
PMID 36731590 DOI 10.1016/j.cgh.2023.01.012
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26; Crossref works API 2026-10-26
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
abstract only
Conflicts of interest and funding

No COI statement in PubMed record

2. Research question

Is food processing associated with risk of Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC)?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Meta-analysis – Systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies
Population

Adults in cohort studies

Country

Multinational

Period

Search to October 2022

Sample size

5 cohorts; 1,068,425 participants; 916 CD and 1,934 UC cases

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Cohort studies of food processing and CD/UC

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

UPF; unprocessed/minimally processed foods

Comparator

Lower consumption

Endpoints

Incident CD and UC

Statistical methods

Random-effects meta-analysis; Newcastle-Ottawa

5. Actual results

Results

UPF: CD HR 1.71 (1.37-2.14; I2 0%); UC HR 1.17 (0.86-1.61; I2 74%). Unprocessed/minimally processed foods: CD HR 0.71 (0.53-0.94); UC HR 0.84 (0.68-1.02).

Absolute risks

not reported in abstract

Authors' conclusion

Higher UPF and lower unprocessed food intakes are associated with higher risk of CD but not UC.

6. Strengths

  • All available cohorts
  • No heterogeneity for CD

7. Weaknesses

  • Only 5 cohorts
  • Includes PURE (A-UPF-12) - overlap

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
AMSTAR 2
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
some concerns
Rationale

Abstract only.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

CIs log-symmetric (stats/C-UPF-05_ibd.py).

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Pooled evidence: association with CD, not UC; refines the claim from 'IBD' to Crohn's disease.

11. Independent contrary findings

UC null.

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

Includes European cohorts.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Supports CD association; not UC.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biassome concerns
Precision of resultsmoderate
Directnessdirect
Reproducibilityreplicated
Consistency with the overall evidenceconsistent
Regional transferabilityhigh
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

Mechanisms; specific components.

15. Linked fact checks