Table 4 Cohort studies on the association of AS consumption and risk of developing diabetes
From: Health outcomes of non-nutritive sweeteners: analysis of the research landscape
First author, publication year | Study sample | Number of participants | Exposure | Main outcome | Direction of effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Prospective cohort studies | |||||
Bhuphatiraju, 2013 [165] | female nurses (age 30–55 y) + male health professionals (age 40–75 y) | 74,749 + 39,059 | ASB | risk of type 2 diabetes | – |
deKonig, 2011 [160] | middle-aged (40–75 y) male health care providers | 40,389 | ASB | incidence of type 2 diabetes | – |
Fagherazzi, 2013 [162] | women | 66,118 | ASB | risk of type 2 diabetes | ↑↑ |
Fagherazzi, 2017 [163] | women | 61,440 | AS in packets or tablets | risk of type 2 diabetes | ↑↑ |
Palmer, 2008 [285] | women (age 21–69 y) | 43,960 | diet soft drink | risk of type 2 diabetes | – |
Schulze, 2004 [217] | healthy women | 91,249 | diet soft drink | risk of diabetes | ↑ |
Sakurai, 2014 [286] | men | 2037 | diet soda | risk of type 2 diabetes | ↑↑ |
Retrospective cohort studies | |||||
Armstrong, 1975 [166] | bladder cancer patients + patients with other cancers | 18,733 + 19,709 | saccharin | prevalence of diabetes | – |
Case-control study | |||||
The Inter Act Consortium, 2013 [164] | type 2 diabetes cases + controls | 11,684 + 15,374 | artificially sweetened soft drink | incidence of type 2 diabetes | ↑ |