Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked I-UPF-116 standard review

Diet drinks and heart disease

Intake of Sugar-Sweetened and Low-Calorie Sweetened Beverages and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Overview

Yin J et al.. Adv Nutr 2021 · PMID 32696948 · DOI 10.1093/advances/nmaa084

Each daily diet drink was linked to 7% more cardiovascular disease across cohort studies; the authors warn this may reflect who drinks them.

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 link sweetened drinks with heart disease.

How was the study done?

Meta-analysis of cohorts.

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

8 articles on diet drinks.

What was actually found?

Diet and sugary drinks both linked to more CVD.

How large was the observed effect?

RR 1.07 per serving.

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Water is the safest choice.

What are the study's limitations?

Reverse causation.

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Supports the association in C-UPF-07.

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

Applicable.

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Cannot prove sweeteners cause CVD.

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Yin J et al.
Journal
Adv Nutr
Year
2021
Identifier
PMID 32696948 DOI 10.1093/advances/nmaa084 · PMC7850046
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; funding listed: NIMHD NIH HHS

2. Research question

Are sugar-sweetened (SSB) and low-calorie sweetened beverages (LCSB) associated with CVD?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Meta-analysis – Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies
Population

Adults in cohorts

Country

Multinational

Period

Search to 1 December 2019

Sample size

8 articles on LCSB (18,077 incident CVD cases, 14,114 CVD deaths); 11 on SSB

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Prospective cohorts

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

LCSB and SSB intake

Comparator

Per serving/day

Endpoints

CVD incidence and mortality

Statistical methods

Dose-response meta-analysis

5. Actual results

Results

LCSB: +1 serving/day CVD incidence RR 1.07 (1.05-1.10; I2 0%); CVD mortality association non-linear, significant above 2 servings/day. SSB: CVD incidence RR 1.08 (1.02-1.14); CVD mortality 1.08 (1.04-1.13).

Absolute risks

not reported in abstract

Authors' conclusion

LCSB were associated with higher CVD risk, but interpretation may be complicated by reverse causation and residual confounding.

6. Strengths

  • Dose-response
  • Multiple cohorts

7. Weaknesses

  • Reverse causation (people at risk switch to diet drinks)
  • Beverages, not total sweetener intake

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

Upper CI rounding asymmetry minor.

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Shows the CVD link for sweetened (diet) drinks is replicated across cohorts, beyond NutriNet-Sante.

11. Independent contrary findings

Reverse causation acknowledged by authors.

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

Applicable.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Supports 'linked to CVD' as an association.

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

14. Open questions

Causality.

15. Linked fact checks