Abstract
Background Ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption is associated prospectively with weight gain and obesity in observational studies of adults. Unaccounted for confounding is a risk when attempting to make causal inference from observational studies. Limited research has examined how feasible it is that unmeasured confounding may explain associations between UPF consumption and weight gain in observational research
Methods We introduce the E value to obesity researchers. The E value is defined as the minimum strength of association that one or more unaccounted for confounding variables would need to have with an exposure (UPF consumption) and outcome (e.g., weight gain) to explain the association between the exposure and outcome of interest. We meta-analysed prospective studies on the association between UPF consumption and weight gain in adults. Next, we applied the E value approach and illustrated the potential role that unmeasured or hypothetical residual confounding variables could have in explaining associations.
Results Higher consumption of UPFs was associated with increased weight gain in meta-analysis (RR=1.14). The corresponding E value = 1.55, indicating that unaccounted for confounding variables with small-to-moderate sized associations with UPF consumption and weight gain (e.g., depressive symptoms, trait overeating tendencies, access to healthy and nutritious food) could individually or collectively account for observed associations between UPF consumption and weight gain.
Conclusions Unaccounted for confounding could plausibly explain the prospective association between UPF consumption and weight gain in adults. High quality observational research controlling for potential confounders and evidence from study types devoid of confounding are now needed.
Competing Interest Statement
ER has previously received funding from Unilever and the American Beverage Association for unrelated research. AJ has previously received funding from Camurus pharmaceuticals, unrelated to this project.
Funding Statement
ER is funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Meta-analysis
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
