ArticleScientific reports2026
Food preferences and mortality risk in the prospective cohort of UK Biobank participants.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Food preferences may serve as less biased proxies for self-reported food intake in predicting health outcomes but have not yet been linked to mortality risk. We included 177,148 UK Biobank participants who completed a food preference questionnaire (FPQ), with a mean follow-up of 3.4 years (607,779 person-years; 3355 deaths). High versus low preference for 140 food items was tested using Cox regression with Holm adjustment. Sensitivity analyses excluded participants with key health conditions, additional supplement use, or short follow-up, added BMI and physical activity as covariates, and redefined preference groups. Higher preference for asparagus (hazard ratio (95% confidence interval)): 0.69 (0.62, 0.77)), aubergine (0.79 (0.72, 0.87)), black pepper (0.72 (0.64, 0.81)), broccoli (0.69 (0.61, 0.79)), butternut squash (0.75 (0.68, 0.83)), and extra virgin olive oil (0.67 (0.58, 0.78)) was linked to lower all-cause mortality, whereas higher preference for regular fizzy drinks (1.38 (1.24, 1.54)) was linked to higher mortality across all analyses. Specific food preferences are associated with all-cause mortality risk. FPQs may, therefore, complement conventional dietary assessments. Further studies should examine their associations with metabolic and cardiovascular outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.