Evidence Hub

Association Between Psychobehavioral Factors and the Increased Eating Rate of Ultra-Processed Versus Non-Ultra-Processed Meals in Individuals with Obesity: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Trial

Barros LM, Peixoto VA, Carvalho GCO, Pereira MR, Carnaúba RTL, Bueno NB

Nutrients, 2025

39 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Background/Objectives: A faster eating rate is associated with increased energy intake and risk of obesity. High consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) is associated with a faster eating rate. Psychobehavioral aspects, such as body image self-perception, eating disorders, and anxiety, may modulate this eating behavior. Therefore, this study examined the moderating role of psychobehavioral factors in the association between meal type (UPF vs non-UPF) and eating rate among individuals with obesity. Methods: It is a secondary analysis of a randomized, parallel clinical trial conducted with 39 adults who have obesity. Participants were assigned to consume either a UPF-only composed meal or a UPF-free meal, both of which were isoenergetic (~550 kcal). Psychobehavioral variables (food addiction-mYFAS 2.0, body image perception and satisfaction-Silhouette Rating Scale, eating disorders-EAT-26, and anxiety-GAD-7) were assessed. Eating rate was measured in kcal/min. Results: Body image perception and satisfaction significantly interacted with the type of meal. In the UPF group, lower body image dissatisfaction was associated with a higher eating rate (β = 4.79 kcal/min; 95% CI: 1.40; 8.19; p = 0.007), while a higher body image perception score was associated with a lower eating rate (β = -4.61 kcal/min; 95% CI: -8.57; -0.65; p = 0.024). No significant associations were observed for food addiction scores, eating disorders or anxiety. Conclusions: Body image modulates the eating…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 39 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free