Evidence review
Stress and eating: average associations in the Hill review
In Hill's review, stress showed small average associations with higher total intake (g=0.114), greater intake of foods the studies classified as less healthy (g=0.116), and lower intake of foods classified as healthy (g=−0.111).
- Evidence design
- Systematic review and meta-analysis
- Population and methods
- Original extraction in Portuguese is available in the study details.
- Assessment period
- Varying protocols and time points across the review
- Reported units
- Hedges’ g
Keep in view
- Small average effects and between-study heterogeneity; not everyone's response.
- 119,820 is the review-wide total; each effect's denominator was not verified.
- Food categories come from the studies; they do not morally characterize people who eat them.
- It does not establish cortisol as a causal mediator.
See study details — Stress and eating review
Review design and extraction scope
Systematic review and meta-analysis
Original extraction (Portuguese)
População
Adultos saudáveis; medidas de estresse explicitamente definidas e comportamentos alimentares variados.
- Study design
- Revisão sistemática e metanálise de 54 estudos sobre estresse e alimentação não transtornada.
- Reported sample count
- 119820
- Role of the reported sample count
- Review-wide total; not an outcome-specific denominator
- Included study count
- 54
- Role of the study count
- Review-wide total; not an outcome-specific denominator
- Research question
- Qual a magnitude da relação entre estresse e ingestão total ou escolhas alimentares?
- Qualified findings
- O estresse se associou a pequena elevação média da ingestão e de alimentos classificados como menos saudáveis, e a menor consumo dos classificados como saudáveis. Heterogeneidade significativa não foi explicada pelos moderadores examinados.
- Estimand and analysis rules
- Not reported or not verified
- Reason the formal estimand is unavailable
- A complete formal estimand was not extracted from the verified input.
How to read this review
Included studies may differ in population, design and outcomes. Review-wide counts describe coverage and cannot be used as the sample size of every estimate.
Included studies: 54 — Review-wide total; not an outcome-specific denominator.
Extracted review results and scope
Study counts describe review scope. Review-wide participant totals are not outcome-specific denominators.
| Outcome and group | Reported value | Assessment period | Sample and denominators | Uncertainty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Association with total intake Stress–eating association Effect estimate | 0.114 Hedges’ g standardized association Unit: Hedges’ g | Varying protocols and time points across the review | Reported N: 119820 — review-wide participants; not an outcome-specific denominator
| Each effect's CI and denominator were not verified in the abstract. |
| Association with foods classified as less healthy in the studies Stress–eating association Effect estimate | 0.116 Hedges’ g standardized association Unit: Hedges’ g | Varying protocols and time points across the review | Reported N: 119820 — review-wide participants; not an outcome-specific denominator
| Each effect's CI and denominator were not verified in the abstract. |
| Association with foods classified as healthy in the studies Stress–eating association Effect estimate | -0.111 Hedges’ g standardized association Unit: Hedges’ g | Varying protocols and time points across the review | Reported N: 119820 — review-wide participants; not an outcome-specific denominator
| Each effect's CI and denominator were not verified in the abstract. |
Association with total intake — Stress–eating association: extraction context
- Outcome role
- Not specified in the consulted scope
- Scale reference
- standardized_effect
- Extraction location
- Original systematic-review abstract
- Synthesis of varied designs; do not interpret it as one causal trial.
Association with foods classified as less healthy in the studies — Stress–eating association: extraction context
- Outcome role
- Not specified in the consulted scope
- Scale reference
- standardized_effect
- Extraction location
- Original systematic-review abstract
- Synthesis of varied designs; do not interpret it as one causal trial.
Association with foods classified as healthy in the studies — Stress–eating association: extraction context
- Outcome role
- Not specified in the consulted scope
- Scale reference
- standardized_effect
- Extraction location
- Original systematic-review abstract
- Synthesis of varied designs; do not interpret it as one causal trial.
What the curated evidence supports
- In Hill's review, stress showed small average associations with higher total intake (g=0.114), greater intake of foods the studies classified as less healthy (g=0.116), and lower intake of foods classified as healthy (g=−0.111).
Limitations
- Small average effects and between-study heterogeneity; not everyone's response.
- 119,820 is the review-wide total; each effect's denominator was not verified.
- Food categories come from the studies; they do not morally characterize people who eat them.
- It does not establish cortisol as a causal mediator.
Verification scope
Verified through 2026-11-04 within the consulted scope.
- Bibliographic metadata checked
- Yes
- Original article abstract consulted
- Yes
- Full-text consultation
- Not consulted
- full text verified fields
- Official trial registry consulted
- No
- Statistical analysis plan consulted
- No
- Verification boundary
- Verification is limited to the input's identified abstract/full-text fields. A trial identifier linked by an article does not imply a separate registry review.
Source record
Stress and eating behaviours in healthy adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2022)