Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39143524›Full record

ReviewBMC public health2024

Mapping ultra-processed foods (UPFs) in India: a formative research study.

Suparna Ghosh-Jerath, Neha Khandpur, Gaurika Kumar, Sahiba Kohli, Meenu Singh, Inderdeep Kaur Bhamra, Fernanda H Marrocos-Leite, K Srinath Reddy

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Relation of ultra-processed food consumption with ulcerative colitis disease activity.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Suparna Ghosh-Jerath *The George Institute for Global Health, 308, Third Floor, Elegance Tower, Plot No. 8, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi, Delhi, 110025, India. SGhosh-Jerath@georgeinstitute.org.in.ORCID 0000-0002-2229-4455
Neha Khandpur *Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Gaurika KumarPublic Health Foundation of India, New Delhi, India.
Sahiba KohliThe George Institute for Global Health, 308, Third Floor, Elegance Tower, Plot No. 8, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi, Delhi, 110025, India.
Meenu SinghPublic Health Foundation of India, New Delhi, India.
Inderdeep Kaur BhamraPublic Health Foundation of India, New Delhi, India.
Fernanda H Marrocos-LeiteCenter for Epidemiological Research in Nutrition and Health, Faculty of Public Health, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
K Srinath ReddyPublic Health Foundation of India, New Delhi, India.

Funding

Innovative Methods and Metrics for Agriculture and Nutrition Actions IMMANA 3.06
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncreased consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) which have additives such as artificial colours, flavours and are usually high in salt, sugar, fats and specific preservatives, are associated with diet-related non-communicable diseases (NCDs). In India, there are no standard criteria for identifying UPFs using a classification system based on extent and purpose of industrial processing. Scientific literature on dietary intake of foods among Indian consumers classifies foods as unhealthy based on presence of excessive amounts of specific nutrients which makes it difficult to distinguish UPFs from other commercially available processed foods.

methodsA literature review followed by an online grocery retailer scan for food label reading was conducted to map the types of UPFs in Indian food market and scrutinize their ingredient list for the presence of ultra-processed ingredients. All UPFs identified were randomly listed and then grouped into categories, followed by saliency analysis to understand preferred UPFs by consumers. Indian UPF categories were then finalized to inform a UPF screener.

resultsA lack of application of a uniform definition for UPFs in India was observed; hence descriptors such as junk-foods, fast-foods, ready-to-eat foods, instant-foods, processed-foods, packaged-foods, high-fat-sugar-and-salt foods were used for denoting UPFs. After initial scanning of such foods reported in literature based on standard definition of UPFs, an online grocery retailer scan of food labels for 375 brands (atleast 3 brands for each food item) confirmed 81 food items as UPFs. A range of packaged traditional recipes were also found to have UPF ingredients. Twenty three categories of UPFs were then developed and subjected to saliency analysis. Breads, chips and sugar-sweetened beverages (e.g. sodas and cold-drinks) were the most preferred UPFs while frozen ready-to-eat/cook foods (e.g. chicken nuggets and frozen kebabs) were least preferred.

conclusionIndia needs to systematically apply a food classification system and define Indian food categories based on the level of industrial processing. Mapping of UPFs is the first step towards development of a quick screener that would generate UPF consumption data to inform clear policy guidelines and regulations around UPFs and address their impact on NCDs.

Indexed as

Fast FoodsFood HandlingFood LabelingFood, ProcessedHumansIndiaIndiaNova food classificationNova-UPF screenerOnline grocery retailer scanTool adaptationUltra-processed foodsUPF categories

Identifiers

PMID39143524
PMCPMC11323379

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.