TABLE 2.
Main findings of the 17 included studies examining the effect of tree nut and peanut consumption on energy intake and/or energy compensation in adults aged ≥18 y
| Reference; country | Energy intake (control diet) | Energy intake (intervention diet) | Energy compensation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alves et al. [37]; Brazil | Data not provided | Data not provided | +102.3% (control)2; +84.0% (HOP)2; +134.2% (CVP).2 No significant difference between groups |
| Energy compensation: HOP: 84.0 (SEM: 23.2); CVP: 134.2 (SEM: 22.7). No significant difference between groups | |||
| Barbour et al. [38]; Australia | Energy intake at buffet meal 3 h after snack: 3031 kJ (SEM: 241) (P < 0.005 vs. both peanut meals) | Energy intake at buffet meal 3 h after snack: high-oleic peanut: 2380 kJ (SEM: 196) (P < 0.001 vs. control) | +39.2% (HOP)3; +30.6% (CVP)3 |
| Regular peanut snack: 2498 kJ (SEM: 186) (P < 0.005 vs. control) | |||
| Brown et al. [40]; New Zealand | Unlimited lunch intake: 2898 (SD: 1329) kJ (P > 0.05 vs. intervention) | Unlimited lunch intake: 2820 (SD: 1343) kJ (P > 0.05 vs. control) | +56.9%3 |
| Remaining energy intake (from diaries): 5200 (SD: 2676) kJ (P > 0.05 vs. intervention) | Remaining energy intake (from diaries): 4658 (SD: 2517) kJ (P > 0.05 vs. control) | ||
| Intake from lunch and remaining day combined: 8132 (SD: 3044) kJ (P < 0.05 vs. intervention) | Intake from lunch and remaining day combined: 7494 (SD: 2589) kJ (P < 0.05 vs. control) | ||
| Burton-Freeman [41]; USA | Low-fat shake | Ground walnut shake | −55.3%3 |
| Energy intake at lunch: 3014 (SEM: 134) kJ (P = 0.09 vs. ground walnut shake; P = 0.02 vs. walnut oil shake) | Energy intake at lunch: 3340 (SEM: 134) kJ (P = 0.09 vs. low-fat shake) | ||
| Total daily energy intake: 10.010 (SEM: 0.476) MJ/d (P > 0.05 vs. all shakes) | Total daily energy intake: 10.218 (SEM: 0.477) MJ/d (P > 0.05 vs. all shakes) | ||
| Safflower oil shake | Walnut oil shake | ||
| Energy intake at lunch: 3198 (SEM: 134) kJ | Energy intake at lunch: 3457 (SEM: 138) kJ (P = 0.02 vs. low-fat shake) | ||
| Total daily energy intake: 10.308 (SEM: 0.506) MJ/d (P > 0.05 vs. all shakes) | Total daily energy intake: 10.695 (SEM: 0.566) MJ/d (P > 0.05 vs. all shakes) | ||
| Burton-Freeman, Davis and Schneeman [42]; USA | Poststudy energy intake | Poststudy energy intake Whole almonds: 8.4 (SEM: 0.7) MJ Almond oil: 6.5 (SEM: 0.7) MJ NS differences among treatment and control arms |
−280.5%3 |
| 7.8 (SEM: 0.7) MJ | |||
| Carughi et al. [43]; France | Postsnack intake: 2216 (SD: 871) kJ Daily energy intake: 7383 (SD: 1510) kJ |
Postsnack intake: 2403 (SD: 941) kJ | +168.0%3 |
| Daily energy intake: 7860 (SD: 1843) kJ | |||
| Both NS vs. control | |||
| Costa et al. [45]; Brazil | Unlimited lunch intake: 923.0 (SEM: 385.0) kcal (P > 0.05 vs. intervention) | Unlimited lunch intake: 963.1 (SEM: 298.8) kcal (P > 0.05 vs. control) | −42.1%3 |
| Food intake postlunch: 1012.6 (SEM: 462.9) kcal (P > 0.05 vs. intervention) | Food intake postlunch: 1089.3 (SEM: 573.3) kcal (P > 0.05 vs. control) | ||
| Devi et al. [46]; New Zealand | Total daily energy intake: 8832 (95% CI: 7376, 10,288) kJ | Total daily energy intake | +16.5% (sliced hazelnuts)3; −11.2% (hazelnut flour)3; +149.4% (combination)3 |
| Sliced: 8699 (95% CI: 7735, 9664) kJ | |||
| Flour: 8904 (95% CI: 8034, 9773) kJ | |||
| Combination: 7749 (95% CI: 6730, 8767) kJ | |||
| NS between breads | |||
| Devitt et al. [47]; USA, Ghana and Brazil | Daily energy intake during snack mix sessions (n = 68): 10,142 (SE: 276) kJ | Daily energy intake during peanut sessions (n = 66): 10376 (SE: 276) kJ | Combining meal and snack sessions: −2.6% (peanuts)3; +20.0% (peanuts in snack mix)3 |
| Daily energy intake during snack mix with peanuts sessions (n = 67): 10293 (SE: 276) kJ | |||
| NS between arms | |||
| Fantino et al. [48]; France | Lunch intake: 677.2 (SEM: 17.3) kcal | Lunch intake: 611.6 (SEM: 17.5) kcal (P < 0.001 vs. control) | +40.5%3 |
| Dinner intake: 717.2 (SEM: 31.6) kcal | Dinner intake: 681.6 (SEM: 29.4) kcal (P > 0.05 vs. control) | ||
| Total daily intake: 1822.4 (SEM: 41.2) kcal1 | Total daily intake: 1721.1 (SEM: 39.5) kcal (P < 0.01 vs. control)1 | ||
| Hollingworth et al. [50]; UK | Water | Almonds Lunch intake: 1007.3 (SD: 299.1) kcal (P < 0.05 vs. water, P > 0.05 vs. cracker) Total daily energy intake: 2992.0 (SD: 654.2) kcal (P > 0.05 vs. water, P > 0.05 vs. cracker) |
+37.3%3 |
| Lunch intake: 1143.6 (SD: 347.4) kcal (P < 0.05 vs. crackers and almonds) | |||
| Total daily energy intake: 2797.2 (SD: 728.2) kcal (P < 0.05 vs. water; P > 0.05 vs. almonds) | |||
| Crackers | |||
| Lunch intake: 1019.6 (SD: 345.6) kcal (P < 0.05 vs. water; P > 0.05 vs. almonds) | |||
| Total daily energy intake: 2990.6 (SD: 748.9) kcal (P < 0.05 vs. water; P > 0.05 vs. almonds) | |||
| Hull et al. [51]; UK | L: 764.1 (SEM: 23.3) kcal D: 1060.0 (SEM: 41.7) kcal Total: 2168.5 (SEM: 59.7) kcal (P > 0.05 vs. interventions) |
28 g Almonds | +72.1% (28 g almonds)3; +114.7% (42 g almonds)3 |
| L: 698.0 (SEM: 31.3) kcal (P < 0.05 vs. control and 42 g) | |||
| D: 1002.1 (SEM: 36.0) kcal (P > 0.05 vs. control, P < 0.05 vs. 42 g) | |||
| Total daily EI: 2216.8 (SEM: 63.6) kcal (P > 0.05 vs. control and 42 g) | |||
| 42 g almonds | |||
| L: 622.06 (SEM: 30.2) kcal (P < 0.05 vs. control and 28 g) | |||
| D: 907.1 (SEM: 36.3) kcal (P < 0.05 vs. control and 28 g) | |||
| Total daily EI: 2130.3 (SEM: 51.5) kcal (P > 0.05 vs. control and 28 g) | |||
| Johnston and Buller [52]; USA | Data not provided | Data not provided | Data not sufficient to calculate compensation |
| Johnston, Trier and Fleming [53]; USA | Total daily energy intake: | Total daily energy intake Peanuts: 1771 (SEM: 149) kcal (P > 0.05 vs. control and grain bar) |
+176.4%3 |
| Control: 1878 (SEM: 209) kcal (P > 0.05 vs. grain bar and peanuts) | |||
| Grain bar: 1756 (SEM: 144) kcal (P > 0.05 vs. control and peanuts) | |||
| Kirkmeyer and Mattes [18]; USA | Daily energy intake (no load): 7905 (SEM: 693) kJ (P > 0.05 vs. interventions) | Daily energy intake | +104% (peanuts)2; +151% (PB)2; +57% (almonds)2; +57% (chestnuts)2 These values are not significantly different |
| Peanuts: 9372 (SEM: 591) kJ | |||
| PB: 8903 (SEM: 611) kJ | |||
| Almonds: 10,024 (SEM: 713) kJ | |||
| Chestnuts: 9616 (SEM: 673) kJ | |||
| These values are not significantly different | |||
| Reis et al. [54]; Brazil | Energy intake in 24 h after test meal: 1738.40 (SEM: 125.91) kcal NS differences among control and intervention arms |
Energy intake in 24 h after test meal | +19.2% (raw peanuts)3; +30.2% (roasted peanuts)3; +18.1% (ground roasted peanuts)3 |
| Raw: 1724.75 (SEM: 93.78) kcal | |||
| Roasted: 1684.75 (SEM: 96.58) kcal | |||
| Ground: 1728.76 (SEM: 109.59) kcal | |||
| NS differences among control and intervention arms | |||
| Reis et al. [55]; Brazil | Daily energy intake: 7842 (SD: 1696) kJ (P > 0.05 vs. interventions) | WP Daily energy intake: 8772 (SD: 2334) kJ | −76.4% (peanuts)3; −21.8% (PB)3 |
| PB Daily energy intake: 8136 (SD: 1620) kJ | |||
| Both arms P > 0.05 vs. control |
CVP, conventional peanut; D, dinner; HOP, high-oleic peanut; L, lunch; NS, not significant; PB, peanut butter; WP, whole peanuts.
1
Energy provided by the snacks excluded.
2
Compensation calculated by the author of the study.
3
Compensation calculated by the reviewer.