Skip to main content
Download PDF
Download ePub

Effects of canola oil on body weight and composition in adults: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of 32 randomized controlled trials

Nutrition Journal volume 24, Article number: 55 (2025) Cite this article

Abstract

Objective

We aim to provide an overview and update the current documents regarding the effect of canola oil (CO) compared to other dietary oils on body weight and composition in adults.

Methods

PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and ISI Web of Science were searched until Sepetember 2024 for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that assessed the effect of CO on anthropometric measures.

Results

In this systematic review and meta-analysis thirty-two studies were included. CO consumption significantly increased WHR (MD: 0.003 cm, 95% CI: 0.001, 0.005, P value: 0.003) and significantly decreased BMI (mean difference (MD): -0.127 kg/m2, 95% C: -0.231, -0.024, P value: 0.016) However, it did not significantly affect other anthropometric measures (P > 0.05). Based on subgroup analysis, CO supplementation significantly reduced BW in studies on T2DM patients, with parallel design, on patients over 50 years old and with a dose of more than 30 g/d. It also significantly increased WC in trials with parallel design and on hyperlipidemia patients. In addition, CO supplementation significantly increased WHR in the majority of subgroups.

Conclusions

Compared to other oil supplementation, CO could decrease BW, BMI and increase WHR, and WC in general or subgroup analysis. Further studies are needed to provide additional insight into how canola oil affects BW and composition in adults.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Obesity is a well-known growing critical risk factor for chronic diseases such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes [1, 2]. This metabolic disorder is defined by the accumulation of fat caused by excess energy consumption [2]. It is reported that almost two billion people will have obesity and 671 million people will have health troubles owing to obesity by 2022 [3]. Overweight and obesity will affect 38% and 20% of the world's adults, respectively, by 2030 [4].

Genetic and environmental factors such as inappropriate diet and low physical activity are the leading risk factors for obesity [5]. Previous studies have demonstrated that the composition of dietary macronutrients like carbohydrates, protein, and fatty acids is related to body weight and body composition [6]. Different fatty acids may play different roles in adiposity. For example, although higher consumption of polyunsaturated fatty acids might be related to weight loss [7], people with a higher intake of saturated fatty acids may experience weight gain [8]. According to this, plant oils with different compositions of fatty acids might affect anthropometric indices differently. Canola oil (CO) is a plant oil which is approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration as a healthy oil in 2006 [9]. It is rich in monounsaturated fats (MUFAs) such as oleic acid (61%) and polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs) such as linoleic acid (21%) and alpha-linolenic acid (11%), as well as a rich source of plant sterols and tocopherols which play an important role in health [10]. There are some documents which have shown that CO can reduce the level of plasma lipids [11]. In addition, the consumption of CO could affect the body's biological functions, and boost immune and cardiovascular health through its anti-thrombotic and anti-oxidative effects [10]. Moreover, PUFA Omega 3 could affect fat oxidation and satiety after meals in obese or overweight people during weight loss [12, 13].

Some previous clinical trials have assayed the effect of CO in comparison to other plant oils on the anthropometric indices and body composition and reached inconsistent results. For instance, in one study, CO caused a significant reduction in fat mass compared to other PUFAs [14]. In contrast, CO supplementation did not change cardiovascular health markers in another study [15]. In 2018, a systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the effect of CO consumption on some anthropometric measurements. It reported that CO supplementation could decrease body weight (BW), with no significant effect on body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), fat mass (FM), waist-hip ratio (WHR), hip circumference (HC), lean body mass (LBM) [16]. Due to the controversial results and the fact that seven more studies have been published on the effects of CO on anthropometric indices, the need to update the previous study is felt. In addition, the effect of CO on visceral fat mass was assayed in the present meta-analysis for the first time. Therefore, we aimed to summarize the latest documents on the effect of CO supplementation on anthropometric indices and body composition.

Methods

The protocol of the present paper has been registered on the PROSPERO website with the registration code CRD42023438451. Also, we used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement guidelines [17].

Search strategy

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus and google scholar up to Sepetember 2024 by using the following Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and non-MeSH keywords: 1) Canola OR colza OR rapeseed OR “brassica rapa” OR “oilseed rape” OR “brassica napus” OR “Brassica juncea” OR “canola oil” OR “rap oil” OR “rapeseed oil” 2) “body composition” OR “fat mass” OR “fat percentage” OR “body fat” OR “lean mass” OR “body lean” OR “body mass” OR weight OR Overweight OR Obesity OR “body mass index” OR BMI OR “Visceral adipose tissue” OR “adipose tissue” OR “Perinephric fat” OR “muscle mass” OR “waist circumference” OR WC OR “waist-hip ratio” OR WHR OR “fat percent” OR “lean body mass” OR LBM OR “weight loss” OR “weight reduction” OR “weight change” 3) “Randomized Controlled Trial” OR “clinical trial” OR “controlled trial” OR “intervention” OR “Randomised” OR “Randomized” OR “randomly” OR “placebo” OR “trial” OR “assignment” OR “RCT” OR “cross-over” OR “parallel” OR “single-blind” OR “double-blind” OR “Controlled Clinical Trial”. In addition, the reference list of the included studies was reviewed to find other relevant articles. Appendix S1 shows the search strategy used for online databases.

Study selection

The eligibility of studies for the present systematic review and meta-analysis was determined by reviewing titles and abstracts of articles by A.M and F.B. Then, A.M and H.B reviewed the full text of selected articles. We resolved the discrepancies by discussing with A.A. We calculated the kappa statistic to determine the level of agreement between reviewers for study selection using SPSS software (ver. 26). To this end, the following interpretation of kappa was used: chance agreement (≤ 0), slight agreement (0.01–0.20), fair agreement (0.21–0.40), moderate agreement (0.41–0.60), substantial agreement (0.61–0.80), almost perfect agreement (0.81–0.99). In this stage, there was perfect agreement in study selection between the reviewers (К statistic, 0.82; p < 0.001).

The original articles included in this systematic review if: 1) were randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs); 2) were done in adults (over 18 years); 3) the subjects involved were given canola oil supplement; 4) the authors reported sufficient information about BW, BMI, HC, WC, WHR, VFM, FM and LBM. Exclusion criteria included: 1) intervention period < 2 weeks; 2) performed in children or adolescents; 3) CO consumption lower than values defined as reasonable based on previous research (< 10 g/d) [18].

Data collection

The required data were collected according to the guidelines of the PRISMA statement. Screening forms were used to identify eligible articles for this research having the inclusion criteria. The data of selected articles were independently reviewed by two authors (A.M. and F.B.). The continuance data collection process included extracting the following data from each study using Microsoft Office Excel 2016 MSO (16.0.4266.1001) software spreadsheet: publication characteristics (first author's full name, year of publication, and country where the study was conducted), participants data (age, health status, body mass index, and gender), characteristics of the study (number of participants, type of control treatment, duration of intervention, dose of intervention and placebo, study design), outcomes (BW, BMI, WHR, FM, LBM, VFM, WC, HC) and how to measure body composition.

We extracted the mean values and standard deviations for the outcomes at baseline, post-intervention, and the changes between them. If data were collected at several time points, just the last measurement values were utilized. Both authors (A.M. and F.B.) separately summarized the data from the included studies and resolved any discrepancies by consulting with A.A. Finally, К statistic was calculated to determine the agreement level between reviewers for data extraction using SPSS software (ver. 26).

Quality assessment

Two researchers (A.M. and F.B.) evaluated the methodological quality of the chosen full texts using the Cochrane criteria, independently [19]. As a result, the assessment of the studies' quality was done by considering allocation concealment, adequacy of sequence generation, blinding, disclosure of attrition (incomplete outcome data), selective reporting of results, and other sources of bias. The studies were categorized as having low, high, or unclear bias risk in each domain following the Cochrane Manual guidelines, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Assessment of the studies’ quality included according to Cochrane guidelines
Full size table

Also, the К statistic was calculated to determine the level of agreement between reviewers for assessing the quality of included studies using SPSS software (ver. 26). Additionally, GRADE evidence profiles were applied to evaluate the overall evidence quality regarding body composition (Table 2).

Table 2 GRADE profile regarding the effect of canola oil on body composition
Full size table

Statistical analysis

We evaluated the effect of consuming canola oil on body weight and composition. The effect sizes were expressed as weighted mean differences (WMDs) along with 95% confidence intervals. We computed the net changes in body composition by extracting the mean (± SD) of pre- and post-intervention periods for both the canola oil and control groups: the value change between the end of the study and the beginning of the study is to subtract the value at baseline from the value at the end. The mean difference was calculated using the following method: (value at the end of follow-up in the treatment group—value at baseline in the treatment group) minus (value at the end of follow-up in the control group—value at baseline in the control group). When there was no informed standard deviation of the mean difference, the result was determined through a mathematical calculation using the following technique: SD = square root [(SD pre-treatment)2 + (SD post-treatment)2—(2 R × SD pre-treatment × SD post-treatment)], assuming a correlation coefficient of 0.5, as a conservative estimate for R which ranges between 0 and 1 [20]. In the case of medians and ranges or 95% CIs, mean and SD values were calculated utilizing the method developed by Hozo et al. [20]. Heterogeneity was tested using Cochran’s Q-test (with significance set at p < 0.1) and the I2 test to estimate the percentage of heterogeneity (I2 value ≥ 50% representing significant heterogeneity). When heterogeneity existed, a random effects model was applied; otherwise, a fixed-effects model was applied. Furthermore, a leave-one-out sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate each study’s effect on the total effect size [20]. The potential publication bias was identified using the funnel plot, Begg’s rank correlation, and Egger’s weighted regression tests. Also, the analysis of the effects of publication bias was adjusted using the Duval & Tweedie “trim and fill” and “failsafe N” methods [21].

Fixed effect analysis was employed for all subgroup analyses. The Comprehensive Meta-analysis version 3.0 was used for all statistical analyses [22]. Statistically significant P value lower than 0.05 was considered.

Results

Results of the search and trial flow

Two authors independently screening the title, abstract and full text of the articles. In this stage, there was perfect agreement in study selection between the reviewers (К statistic, 0.86; p < 0.001).

From a total of 3094 articles found in various databases including PubMed-MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, 312 duplicate articles were removed. We additionally removed 2721 articles by screening the title and abstract. We examined the 53 articles that were left by reading all the content and eliminated 21 studies for various reasons: studies did not report the relevant endpoints (n = 5) [23,24,25,26,27], reporting duplicate data (n = 2) [28, 29], or having no data of interest (n = 14) [30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43] (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow diagram of the study selection procedure 17 showing the number of eligible studies for the meta-analysis of the effect of canola oil on anthropometric measurements

Full size image

Study characteristics

Characteristics of eligible studies are summarized in Table 3. The sample size of the included studies was between 10 [44] and 119 participants [45]. Out of the 32 included studies, 21 studies were performed in Europe [44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64], 1 in America [65] and 10 studies in Asia [66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75]. The duration of the trials was between 3 and 28 weeks. Five studies were conducted in women only [44, 64, 67, 69, 70], two in men only [51, 71] and the rest of the eligible studies involved both genders. 23 studies had a parallel design [46, 47, 49, 51,52,53,54,55,56, 59, 61,62,63,64,65, 67, 69,70,71,72,73,74,75], and nine studies had a crossover design [44, 45, 48, 50, 57, 58, 60, 66, 68]. A wide range of canola oil supplement doses between 12 g/d [46] and 50 g/d [53] were used in the intervention groups. Participant characteristics also varied between studies, many focusing on special and diseased populations: obesity [50, 53, 54, 57, 59], type 2 diabetes [55, 66, 67, 70, 75], metabolic syndrome [45, 61], NAFLD [51, 71], hyperlipidemia [48, 49, 58, 62,63,64, 72,73,74], healthy [44, 47, 52, 56, 60, 65, 68], coronary artery disease [46] and osteoporosis [69].

Table 3 Demographic Characteristics of the included studies
Full size table

Meta-analysis results

Thirty studies including a total of 1772 participants reported BW as an outcome measure [44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61, 63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74]. Combined results from the fixed effects model indicated that BW did not change significantly following CO consumption (MD:—0.017 kg, 95% CI: −0.195, 0.161, P value: 0.85) (Fig. 2) with non-significant heterogeneity between the studies (I2 = 0.0%, P value = 0.883, Mean PI = −0.01, 95% PI = −0.18, 0.16).

Fig. 2
figure 2

The effect of CO consumption on BW

Full size image

Twenty-one studies including a total of 1337 participants reported BMI as an outcome measure [47, 48, 51, 53, 54, 56, 57, 59,60,61,62,63,64, 66, 68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75]. The fixed effects model indicated that BMI change significantly following canola oil consumption in combined results (mean difference (MD): −0.127 kg/m2, 95% C: −0.231, −0.024, P value: 0.016)(Fig. 3) with non-significant heterogeneity between studies (I2 = 31.07%, P value = 0.064, Mean PI = −0.12, 95% PI = −0.43, 0.19).

Fig. 3
figure 3

The effect of CO consumption on BMI

Full size image

Thirteen studies including a total of 659 participants reported an association between canola oil consumption and WHR [51, 53, 54, 56, 57, 59, 60, 63, 64, 66, 68, 69, 73]. Overall results from the fixed-effects model indicated that canola oil consumption resulted in a significant change in WHR (MD: 0.003 cm, 95% CI: 0.001, 0.005, P value: 0.003) (Fig. 4). There was no significant heterogeneity between these studies (I2 = 36.915%, P value = 0.081, Mean PI = 0.003, 95% PI = −0.3, 0.31). As Azemati et al.'s study had a large deviation from the other studies with a difference in mean of 0.86 cm, we repeated the analysis once without this study. This exclusion did not alter the results (MD: 0.003 cm, P value:0.003).

Fig. 4
figure 4

The effect of CO consumption on WHR

Full size image

Seven studies including a total of 434 participants reported fat mass as an outcome measure [51, 53, 54, 61, 64, 66, 68]. Combined results from the fixed effects model indicated that fat mass did.

not change significantly following canola oil consumption (MD: 0.101 kg, 95% CI: −0.191, 0.393, P value: 0.499) (Fig. 5) with non-significant heterogeneity between the studies (I2 = 0.0%, P value = 0.981, Mean PI = 0.1, 95% PI = −0.28, 0.48).

Fig. 5
figure 5

The effect of CO consumption on Fat Mass

Full size image

Seven studies including a total of 505 participants reported HC as an outcome measure [54, 64, 66, 68, 69, 72, 73]. Combined results from the fixed effects model indicated that HC did not change significantly following canola oil consumption (MD: −0.135 cm, 95% CI: −0.531, 0.26, P value: 0.503) (Fig. 6) with non-significant heterogeneity between the studies (I2 = 0.0%, P value = 0.995, Mean PI = −0.13, 95% PI = −0.64, 0.38).

Fig. 6
figure 6

The effect of CO consumption on HC

Full size image

Five studies including a total of 349 participants reported LBM as an outcome measure [54, 59, 61, 66, 68]. Combined results from the fixed effects model indicated that LBM did not change significantly following canola oil consumption (MD: −0.102 kg, 95% CI: −0.289, 0.086, P value: 0.287) (Fig. 7) with non-significant heterogeneity between the studies (I2 = 0.0%, P value = 0.896, Mean PI = −0.1, 95% PI = −0.39, 0.19).

Fig. 7
figure 7

The effect of CO consumption on LBM

Full size image

Three studies including a total of 249 participants reported VFM as an outcome measure [54, 66, 68]. Combined results from the fixed effects model indicated that VFM did not change significantly following canola oil consumption (MD: 0.014 kg, 95% CI: −0.126, 0.154, P value: 0.845) (Fig. 8) with non-significant heterogeneity between the studies (I2 = 0.0%, P value = 0.883, Mean PI = 0.01, 95% PI = −0.89, 0.91).

Fig. 8
figure 8

The effect of CO consumption on VFM

Full size image

Fourteen research projects, with a combined total of 1144 participants, used WC as a measurement for their results [47, 54, 55, 57, 61, 64, 66, 68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75]. The random effects model results showed that there was no significant change in WC after consuming canola oil (mean difference (MD): 0.325 cm, 95% CI: −0.47, 1.12, P value: 0.426) (Fig. 9) with significant heterogeneity between the studies (I2 = 71.25%, P value < 0.001). As Noroozi et al. had a large deviation from the other studies with a difference in the mean of 24.4 cm, we performed the relevant analysis once again without of this study. No significant change occurred (mean difference (MD): 0.075 cm, P value: 0.76, Mean PI = 0.32, 95% PI = −0.8, 1.44).

Fig. 9
figure 9

The effect of CO consumption on WC

Full size image

Sensitivity analysis

The effect sizes for the effect of canola oil on all variables assessed in the present study were robust in sensitivity analyses, indicating that removing any trial did not significantly affect the results.

Results from subgroup analysis

Table 4 contains the subgroup analysis results. We classified the studies according to design, country, type of study population, age (year), type of intervention in the control group, duration (weeks), and canola oil dosage (g/d). The subgroup analysis showed that canola oil supplementation could significantly reduce BW in type 2 diabetes patients (WMD: −0.431 kg, 95% CI: −0.72, −0.13, P value: 0.005), parallel design studies (WMD: −0.4 kg, 95% CI: −0.75, −0.006, P value: 0.01), patients over 50 years old (WMD: −0.731 kg, 95% CI: −1.11, −0.34, P value < 0.001) and the use of canola oil with a dose of more than 30 g/d (WMD: −0.73 kg, 95% CI: −1.12, −0.34, P value < 0.001).

Table 4 Results of subgroup analysis of the included trials regarding the effects of canola oil on body weight and composition
Full size table

In addition, canola oil supplementation significantly increased WC only in parallel design studies (WMD: 0.65 cm, 955 CI: 0.07, 1.23, P value: 0.028), hyperlipidemia patients (WMD: 5.12 cm, 95% CI: 1.53, 8.7, P value: 0.005), no intervention of oil in the control group (WMD: 0.84 cm, 95% CI: 0.18, 1.51, P value: 0.013) and the use of canola oil with a dose of more than 30 g/d (WMD: 0.77 cm, 95% CI: 0.07, 1.47, P value: 0.03).

Moreover, the subgroup analysis related to the WHR variable showed that canola oil supplementation could significantly increase WHR only in cross-over design studies (WMD: 0.003 cm, 95% CI: 0.001, 0.005, P value: 0.004), Asian population(WMD: 0.003 cm, 95% CI: 0.001, 0.006, P value: 0.002), healthy population (WMD: 0.003 cm, 95% CI: 0.000, 0.005, P value: 0.03), type 2 diabetes patients (WMD: 0.003 cm, 95% CI: 0.000, 0.006, P value: 0.04), postmenopausal patients (WMD: 0.26 cm, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.49, P value: 0.01), patients under 50 years of age (WMD: 0.003 cm, 95% CI: 0.001, 0.005, P value: 0.002) and studies with a duration of more than 8 weeks (WMD: 0.003 cm, 95% CI: 0.001, 0.006, P value: 0.002).

In addition, the subgroup analysis showed that canola oil supplementation could significantly reduce BMI only in parallel design (WMD: −0.41 kg/m2, 95% CI: −0.98, −0.47, P value: < 0.001), T2DM patients (WMD: −0.73 kg/m2, 95% CI: −0.6, −0.21, P value: < 0.001), patients over 50 years of age (WMD: −0.68 kg/m2, 95% CI: −092, −0.45, P value: < 0.001) and intervention of sunflower oil in the control group (WMD: −0.4 kg/m2, 95% CI: −066, −0.14, P value: 0.003).

No other significant effects of CO were seen in other anthropometric indices including: HC, VFM, FM, and LBM in subgroup analysis.

Publication bias

After applying the “trim and fill” method, some studies were added to account for potential missing data in the weight and body composition meta-analysis to adjust for publication bias. Table 5 summarizes the results of Begg’s rank correlation, Egger’s liner regression, “fail-safe N” tests, and correlated effect size.

Table 5 Publication bias for anthropometric mesearments
Full size table

Discussion

In the present study, we summarized and analyzed the results of RCTs investigating the effect of CO consumption on anthropometric measurements [15, 74, 76,77,78,79,80,81]. Based on our findings, CO supplementation could not significantly alter BW and WC but slightly increase WHR. In addition, no significant changes were seen in other anthropometric indicators including BMI, FM, HC, LBM, and VFM after supplementation with CO. The results of the current meta-analysis changed the previously published meta-analysis in 2018 [16]. We investigate nearly 650 more participants rather than the previous one [16]. In addition, the effect of CO consumption on visceral fat mass was assayed for the first time in the present study.

Obesity is one of the most important health concerns worldwide [82]. Recently studies regarding the effects of nutritional supplementation for reducing or controlling obesity have been published [83,84,85]. In the present study, supplementation with CO did not significantly alter the BW. However, based on the result from the subgroup analysis, CO supplementation significantly decreased body weight in parallel design studies, diabetic patients, people more than 50 years old, and studies with consumption of more than 30 gr canola per day. Unlike our results, a previously published meta-analysis demonstrated that CO supplementation could decrease BW in all participants [16]. Based on our results, it seems there is a dose-dependent response to the consumption of CO. It seems that the weight loss effect of CO will appear in case of consumption of more than 30 g per day, in which we didn’t see any significant effect from CO supplementation in people who consumed less than 30 g of CO per day. In addition, diabetic patients and older people (> 50y) might take more advantage of supplementation with CO [86]. Based on evidence saturated fatty acids are more fattening compared to unsaturated fatty acids. The type of dietary fatty acids and the appropriate omega-3 to omega-6 ratio are also effective in the amount of fat deposition in the body [87]. It is noteworthy that CO is a rich source of essential unsaturated fatty acids such as omega-3 and −6 and also has a suitable ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 (1:2), which could explain its anti-obesity effects. In addition, special fatty acids such as MCTs (which are high in CO) could induce satiety more than long-chain fatty acids [88].

Our findings revealed no significant effect of CO on WC. However, subgroup analysis showed that CO supplementation significantly increased WC in studies with parallel design, hyperlipidemia patients, studies with no intervention of any oils in the control group, and intake of CO as the amount of more than 30 g/d. This finding followed the results from the previously published meta-analysis study [24]. Consistent with our result, CO oil had no significant effect on WC in people with dyslipidemia in another meta-analysis [89]. In addition, we found that supplementation with CO could slightly increase WHR. In the subgroup analysis, WHR also significantly increased after CO supplementation in studies with cross-over design, Asian population, healthy population, type 2 diabetes patients, postmenopausal patients, patients under 50 years of age, and studies with a duration of more than 8 weeks. Although previous studies have shown that PUFA dietary source could alter fat distribution and improve metabolic risk factors [90], in some studies, for example, feeding a high-fat diet based on CO increased abdominal fat mass compared to the control group (receiving soybean oil and cornstarch) in rats [91]. In addition, another study showed that the consumption of oils containing omega-3 fatty acids could not significantly affect obesity-related risk factors [92]. Therefore the recommendation to consume CO should be taken with caution and attention. Maybe some other factors such as total dietary fat and the amount of CO consumption alter the effect. Because of the important effect of visceral fat on health issues, more RCTs are needed to investigate the accurate effect of CO on abdominal obesity.

This meta-analysis revealed that the CO supplementation did not significantly alter BMI, HC, VFM, FM, and LBM. Also, subgroup analysis showed no significant effect. It must be kept in mind that the amount of CO consumption is an important factor in achieving the desired results. For example, the consumption of 12.5 g of MCT (155 cal) in breakfast compared to intake up to > 20% of total daily energy (54 g of MCT daily or ~ 18 g per meal) did not show significant changes in body composition [93]. The health condition of participants also could affect the impact of CO consumption on body composition [93]. For example, the difference in BMI greatly affects the amount of oxidation and synthesis of fat in body tissues, especially the liver [94].

Our study has some strengths and limitations. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis on a large number of clinical trials in which the effects of CO consumption on various anthropometric measurements were investigated. In addition, the subgroup analysis was done based on various anthropometric variables to detect the accurate effect of CO in participants. We also did a sub-group analysis based on a large number of variables. To cover all relevant literature, a complete search was conducted across 4 databases (PubMed, ISI Web of Science, SCOPUS, Google Scholar) using PRISMA guidelines. In addition, the reference lists of the related reviews were searched. Standard methodologies were utilized to assess kappa statistics between the authors, heterogeneity, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias. There was perfect agreement in study selection between the reviewers. Also, the reviewers had substantial agreement regarding data extraction and quality assessment. In addition, the GRADE evidence profiles were applied to assess the total quality of evidence related to the effect of canola oil on body composition. However, some limitations should be considered when our results interfere. The first limitation is the high between-study heterogeneity. Therefore, the interpretation of our findings should be done cautiously. We did a subgroup analysis to find the possible sources of heterogeneity. However, in some cases, these analyses were not able to resolve this problem. Second, included participants had different health conditions which further highlights the need for caution in the interpretation. We did a subgroup analysis to seek the precise effect of CO on anthropometric indicators in different conditions. Third, it must be kept in mind that some studies have evaluated the anthropometric index as a secondary outcome which could be different from studies that have investigated these indicators as a primary outcome.

It is suggested to conduct more RCTs with larger sample sizes and longer durations of intervention regarding the effect of canola oil on body composition in the future. Furthermore, it is suggested that more studies be conducted on the mechanisms regarding the effect of canola oil on body composition in the future.

Conclusion

Compared to other oil supplementation, CO could decrease BW, BMI and increase WHR, and WC in general or subgroup analysis. Further studies are needed to provide additional insight into how canola oil affects BW and composition in adults.

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

References

  1. Gazarova M, Galsneiderova M, Meciarova L. Obesity diagnosis and mortality risk based on a body shape index (ABSI) and other indices and anthropometric parameters in university students. Roczniki Państwowego Zakładu Higieny. 2019;70(3).

  2. Sommer I, Teufer B, Szelag M, Nussbaumer-Streit B, Titscher V, Klerings I, et al. The performance of anthropometric tools to determine obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):12699.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Loos RJ, Yeo GS. The genetics of obesity: from discovery to biology. Nat Rev Genet. 2022;23(2):120–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Koliaki C, Spinos T, Spinou Μ, Brinia Μ-E, Mitsopoulou D, Katsilambros N, editors. Defining the optimal dietary approach for safe, effective and sustainable weight loss in overweight and obese adults. Healthcare; 2018: Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute.

  5. Williams R, Periasamy M. Genetic and environmental factors contributing to visceral adiposity in Asian populations. Endocrinol Metab. 2020;35(4):681–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Leidy HJ, Clifton PM, Astrup A, Wycherley TP, Westerterp-Plantenga MS, Luscombe-Marsh ND et al. The role of protein in weight loss and maintenance. The American journal of clinical nutrition. 2015;101(6):1320S–9S.

  7. Westerterp-Plantenga MS, Lemmens SG, Westerterp KR. Dietary protein–its role in satiety, energetics, weight loss and health. British journal of nutrition. 2012;108(S2):S105–2.

  8. Bosy-Westphal A, Müller MJ. Impact of carbohydrates on weight regain. Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition & Metabolic Care. 2015;18(4):389–94.

  9. Loganes C, Ballali S, Minto C. Main properties of canola oil components: a descriptive review of current knowledge. Open Agric J. 2016;10(1).

  10. Lin L, Allemekinders H, Dansby A, Campbell L, Durance-Tod S, Berger A, et al. Evidence of health benefits of canola oil. Nutr Rev. 2013;71(6):370–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. McDonald BE, Gerrard JM, Bruce VM, Corner EJ. Comparison of the effect of canola oil and sunflower oil on plasma lipids and lipoproteins and on in vivo thromboxane A2 and prostacyclin production in healthy young men. Am J Clin Nutr. 1989;50(6):1382–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Couet C, Delarue J, Ritz P, Antoine J, Lamisse F. Effect of dietary fish oil on body fat mass and basal fat oxidation in healthy adults. Int J Obes. 1997;21(8):637–43.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Parra D, Ramel A, Bandarra N, Kiely M, Martínez JA, Thorsdottir I. A diet rich in long chain omega-3 fatty acids modulates satiety in overweight and obese volunteers during weight loss. Appetite. 2008;51(3):676–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Liu X, Kris-Etherton PM, West SG, Lamarche B, Jenkins DJ, Fleming JA, et al. Effects of canola and high-oleic-acid canola oils on abdominal fat mass in individuals with central obesity. Obesity. 2016;24(11):2261–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Nicol K, Mansoorian B, Latosinska A, Koutroulaki A, Mullen B, Combet E. No evidence of differential impact of sunflower and rapeseed oil on biomarkers of coronary artery disease or chronic kidney disease in healthy adults with overweight and obesity: result from a randomised control trial. Eur J Nutr. 2022;61(6):3119–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Raeisi-Dehkordi H, Amiri M, Humphries KH, Salehi-Abargouei A. The effect of canola oil on body weight and composition: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials. Adv Nutr. 2019;10(3):419–32.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. bmj. 2021;29:372.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Mackay DS, Jew S, Jones PJ. Best practices for design and implementation of human clinical trials studying dietary oils. Prog Lipid Res. 2017;65:1–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Higgins JP. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.0. 1. The Cochrane Collaboration. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org. 2008.

  20. Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I. Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005;5:1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Duval S, Tweedie R. Trim and fill: a simple funnel-plot–based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics. 2000;56(2):455–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Borenstein M, Rothstein H. Comprehensive meta-analysis: Biostat; 1999.

  23. Ramprasath VR, Thandapilly SJ, Yang S, Abraham A, Jones PJ, Ames N. Effect of consuming novel foods consisting high oleic canola oil, barley β-glucan, and DHA on cardiovascular disease risk in humans: the CONFIDENCE (Canola Oil and Fibre with DHA Enhanced) study - protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2015;16:489.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Gillingham LG, Robinson KS, Jones PJ. Effect of high-oleic canola and flaxseed oils on energy expenditure and body composition in hypercholesterolemic subjects. Metabolism. 2012;61(11):1598–605.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Jones PJ, Senanayake VK, Pu S, Jenkins DJ, Connelly PW, Lamarche B, et al. DHA-enriched high-oleic acid canola oil improves lipid profile and lowers predicted cardiovascular disease risk in the canola oil multicenter randomized controlled trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014;100(1):88–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Jamka M, Morawska A, Krzyżanowska-Jankowska P, Bajerska J, Przysławski J, Walkowiak J, et al. Comparison of the effect of amaranth oil vs. rapeseed oil on selected atherosclerosis markers in overweight and obese subjects: a randomized double-blind cross-over trial. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(16):8540.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Pu S, Khazanehei H, Jones PJ, Khafipour E. Interactions between obesity status and dietary intake of monounsaturated and polyunsaturated oils on human gut microbiome profiles in the Canola Oil Multicenter Intervention Trial (COMIT). Front Microbiol. 2016;7:1612.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Amiri M, Raeisi-Dehkordi H, Moghtaderi F, Zimorovat A, Mohyadini M, Salehi-Abargouei A. The effects of sesame, canola, and sesame-canola oils on cardiometabolic markers in patients with type 2 diabetes: a triple-blind three-way randomized crossover clinical trial. Eur J Nutr. 2022;61(7):3499–516.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Amiri M, Ghaneian MT, Zare-Sakhvidi MJ, Rahmanian M, Nadjarzadeh A, Moghtaderi F, et al. The effect of canola oil compared with sesame and sesame-canola oil on cardio-metabolic biomarkers in patients with type 2 diabetes: design and research protocol of a randomized, triple-blind, three-way, crossover clinical trial. ARYA Atherosclerosis. 2019;15(4):168.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Jannathulla R, Dayal JS, Ambasankar K, Yuvapushpa R, Kumar JA, Muralidhar M. Evaluation of fungal fermented rapeseed meal as a fishmeal substitute in the diet of Penaeus vannamei. J Coast Res. 2019:82–9.

  31. Grenov B, Larnkjær A, Ritz C, Michaelsen KF, Damsgaard CT, Mølgaard C. The effect of milk and rapeseed protein on growth factors in 7–8 year-old healthy children - A randomized controlled trial. Growth Horm IGF Res. 2021;60–61: 101418.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Rudkowska I, Roynette CE, Nakhasi DK, Jones PJ. Phytosterols mixed with medium-chain triglycerides and high-oleic canola oil decrease plasma lipids in overweight men. Metabolism. 2006;55(3):391–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Gladine C, Combe N, Vaysse C, Pereira B, Huertas A, Salvati S, et al. Optimized rapeseed oil enriched with healthy micronutrients: a relevant nutritional approach to prevent cardiovascular diseases. Results of the Optim’Oils randomized intervention trial. J Nutr Biochem. 2013;24(3):544–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Rzehak P, Koletzko S, Koletzko B, Sausenthaler S, Reinhardt D, Grübl A, et al. Growth of infants fed formula rich in canola oil (low erucic acid rapeseed oil). Clin Nutr. 2011;30(3):339–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Baril-Gravel L, Labonté ME, Couture P, Vohl MC, Charest A, Guay V, et al. Docosahexaenoic acid-enriched canola oil increases adiponectin concentrations: a randomized crossover controlled intervention trial. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2015;25(1):52–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Calabrese C, Myer S, Munson S, Turet P, Birdsall TC. A cross-over study of the effect of a single oral feeding of medium chain triglyceride oil vs. canola oil on post-ingestion plasma triglyceride levels in healthy men. Altern Med Rev. 1999;4(1):23–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Davis KM, Petersen KS, Bowen KJ, Jones PJH, Taylor CG, Zahradka P, et al. Effects of diets enriched with conventional or high-oleic canola oils on vascular endothelial function: a sub-study of the Canola Oil Multi-Centre Intervention Trial 2 (COMIT-2), a randomized crossover controlled feeding study. Nutrients. 2022;14(16):3404.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Pedersen A, Marckmann P, Sandstrom B. Postprandial lipoprotein, glucose and insulin responses after two consecutive meals containing rapeseed oil, sunflower oil or palm oil with or without glucose at the first meal. Br J Nutr. 1999;82(2):97–104.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Fleddermann M, Fechner A, Rößler A, Bähr M, Pastor A, Liebert F, et al. Nutritional evaluation of rapeseed protein compared to soy protein for quality, plasma amino acids, and nitrogen balance–a randomized cross-over intervention study in humans. Clin Nutr. 2013;32(4):519–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Senanayake VK, Pu S, Jenkins DA, Lamarche B, Kris-Etherton PM, West SG, et al. Plasma fatty acid changes following consumption of dietary oils containing n-3, n-6, and n-9 fatty acids at different proportions: preliminary findings of the Canola Oil Multicenter Intervention Trial (COMIT). Trials. 2014;15: 136.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Yang S. Evaluating effects of foods containing high oleic canola oil, DHA, and fibre on body composition and fatty acid metabolism: the CONFIDENCE (canola oil and fibre with DHA enhanced) study. 2017.

  42. Mothwa M, Jacobs A, Dlamini NR. Protein digestibility of soybean, canola and sunflower meal, and its effect on growth performance and body. 2013.

  43. Grenov B, Larnkjær A, Ritz C, Michaelsen KF, Damsgaard CT, Mølgaard C. The effect of milk and rapeseed protein on growth factors in 7–8 year-old healthy children–A randomized controlled trial. Growth Hormon IGF Res. 2021;60:101418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Uusitupa M, Schwab U, Mäkimattila S, Karhapää P, Sarkkinen E, Maliranta H, et al. Effects of two high-fat diets with different fatty acid compositions on glucose and lipid metabolism in healthy young women. Am J Clin Nutr. 1994;59(6):1310–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Bowen KJ, Kris-Etherton PM, West SG, Fleming JA, Connelly PW, Lamarche B, et al. Diets enriched with conventional or high-oleic acid canola oils lower atherogenic lipids and lipoproteins compared to a diet with a western fatty acid profile in adults with central adiposity. J Nutr. 2019;149(3):471–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Herrmann W, Biermann J, Kostner GM. Comparison of effects of N-3 to N-6 fatty acids on serum level of lipoprotein(a) in patients with coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 1995;76(7):459–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Nicol K, Mansoorian B, Latosinska A, Koutroulaki A, Mullen B, Combet E. No evidence of differential impact of sunflower and rapeseed oil on biomarkers of coronary artery disease or chronic kidney disease in healthy adults with overweight and obesity: result from a randomised control trial. Eur J Nutr. 2022;61(6):3119-33.

  48. Iggman D, Gustafsson IB, Berglund L, Vessby B, Marckmann P, Risérus U. Replacing dairy fat with rapeseed oil causes rapid improvement of hyperlipidaemia: a randomized controlled study. J Intern Med. 2011;270(4):356–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Södergren E, Gustafsson IB, Basu S, Nourooz-Zadeh J, Nälsén C, Turpeinen A, et al. A diet containing rapeseed oil-based fats does not increase lipid peroxidation in humans when compared to a diet rich in saturated fatty acids. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2001;55(11):922–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Liu X, Kris-Etherton PM, West SG, Lamarche B, Jenkins DJ, Fleming JA, et al. Effects of canola and high-oleic-acid canola oils on abdominal fat mass in individuals with central obesity. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2016;24(11):2261–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Kruse M, Kemper M, Gancheva S, Osterhoff M, Dannenberger D, Markgraf D, et al. Dietary rapeseed oil supplementation reduces hepatic steatosis in obese men-a randomized controlled trial. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2020;64(21): e2000419.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Kratz M, von Eckardstein A, Fobker M, Buyken A, Posny N, Schulte H, et al. The impact of dietary fat composition on serum leptin concentrations in healthy nonobese men and women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002;87(11):5008–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Kruse M, von Loeffelholz C, Hoffmann D, Pohlmann A, Seltmann AC, Osterhoff M, et al. Dietary rapeseed/canola-oil supplementation reduces serum lipids and liver enzymes and alters postprandial inflammatory responses in adipose tissue compared to olive-oil supplementation in obese men. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2015;59(3):507–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Moszak M, Zawada A, Juchacz A, Grzymisławski M, Bogdański P. Comparison of the effect of rapeseed oil or amaranth seed oil supplementation on weight loss, body composition, and changes in the metabolic profile of obese patients following 3-week body mass reduction program: a randomized clinical trial. Lipids Health Dis. 2020;19(1):143.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Jenkins DJ, Kendall CW, Vuksan V, Faulkner D, Augustin LS, Mitchell S, et al. Effect of lowering the glycemic load with canola oil on glycemic control and cardiovascular risk factors: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2014;37(7):1806–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Ohrvall M, Gustafsson IB, Vessby B. The alpha and gamma tocopherol levels in serum are influenced by the dietary fat quality. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2001;14(1):63–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Dus-Zuchowska M, Walkowiak J, Morawska A, Krzyzanowska-Jankowska P, Miskiewicz-Chotnicka A, Przyslawski J, et al. Amaranth oil increases total and LDL cholesterol levels without influencing early markers of atherosclerosis in an overweight and obese population: a randomized double-blind cross-over study in comparison with rapeseed oil supplementation. Nutrients. 2019;11(12):3069.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Nydahl M, Gustafsson IB, Ohrvall M, Vessby B. Similar effects of rapeseed oil (canola oil) and olive oil in a lipid-lowering diet for patients with hyperlipoproteinemia. J Am Coll Nutr. 1995;14(6):643–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Kanikowska D, Kanikowska A, Rutkowski R, Włochal M, Orzechowska Z, Juchacz A, et al. Amaranth (Amaranthus cruentus L.) and canola (Brassica napus L.) oil impact on the oxidative metabolism of neutrophils in the obese patients. Pharm Biol. 2019;57(1):140–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Chisholm A, Mc Auley K, Mann J, Williams S, Skeaff M. Cholesterol lowering effects of nuts compared with a Canola oil enriched cereal of similar fat composition. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2005;15(4):284–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Baxheinrich A, Stratmann B, Lee-Barkey YH, Tschoepe D, Wahrburg U. Effects of a rapeseed oil-enriched hypoenergetic diet with a high content of α-linolenic acid on body weight and cardiovascular risk profile in patients with the metabolic syndrome. Br J Nutr. 2012;108(4):682–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Seppänen-Laakso T, Vanhanen H, Laakso I, Kohtamäki H, Viikari J. Replacement of margarine on bread by rapeseed and olive oils: effects on plasma fatty acid composition and serum cholesterol. Ann Nutr Metab. 1993;37(4):161–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Gustafsson I-B, Vessby B, Ohrvall M, Nydahl M. A diet rich in monounsaturated rapeseed oil reduces the lipoprotein cholesterol concentration and increases the relative content of n− 3 fatty acids in serum in hyperlipidemic subjects. Am J Clin Nutr. 1994;59(3):667–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Dobrzyńska MA, Przysławski J. The effect of camelina oil (α-linolenic acid) and canola oil (oleic acid) on lipid profile, blood pressure, and anthropometric parameters in postmenopausal women. Arch Med Sci. 2021;17(6):1566–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Wardlaw GM, Snook JT, Lin MC, Puangco MA, Kwon JS. Serum lipid and apolipoprotein concentrations in healthy men on diets enriched in either canola oil or safflower oil. Am J Clin Nutr. 1991;54(1):104–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Raeisi-Dehkordi H, Amiri M, Moghtaderi F, Zimorovat A, Rahmanian M, Mozaffari-Khosravi H, et al. Effects of sesame, canola and sesame-canola oils on body weight and composition in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized, triple-blind, cross-over clinical trial. J Sci Food Agric. 2021;101(14):6083–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Salar A, Faghih S, Pishdad GR. Rice bran oil and canola oil improve blood lipids compared to sunflower oil in women with type 2 diabetes: A randomized, single-blind, controlled trial. J Clin Lipidol. 2016;10(2):299–305.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Moghtaderi F, Amiri M, Zimorovat A, Raeisi-Dehkordi H, Rahmanian M, Hosseinzadeh M, et al. The effect of canola, sesame and sesame-canola oils on body fat and composition in adults: a triple-blind, three-way randomised cross-over clinical trial. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2021;72(2):226–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Azemati M, Shakerhosseini R, Hekmatdos A, Alavi-Majd H, Hedayati M, Houshiarrad A, et al. Comparison of the effects of canola oil versus sunflower oil on the biochemical markers of bone metabolism in osteoporosis. J Res Med Sci. 2012;17(12):1137–43.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Atefi M, Pishdad GR, Faghih S. The effects of canola and olive oils on insulin resistance, inflammation and oxidative stress in women with type 2 diabetes: a randomized and controlled trial. J Diabetes Metab Disord. 2018;17(2):85–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Nigam P, Bhatt S, Misra A, Chadha DS, Vaidya M, Dasgupta J, et al. Effect of a 6-month intervention with cooking oils containing a high concentration of monounsaturated fatty acids (olive and canola oils) compared with control oil in male Asian Indians with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2014;16(4):255–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Saedi S, Noroozi M, Khosrotabar N, Mazandarani S, Ghadrdoost B. How canola and sunflower oils affect lipid profile and anthropometric parameters of participants with dyslipidemia. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2017;31:5.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Noroozi M, Zavoshy R, Hashemi HJ. The effects of low-calorie diet with canola oil on blood lipids in hyperlipidemic patients. J Food Nutr Res. 2009;48(4):178–82.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Chauhan S, Aeri B. Consumption of canola oil vs. other common oil (s) in dyslipidemia management among urban Indian adults. Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan. 2020;15(3):159–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Nikooyeh B, Zargaraan A, Ebrahimof S, Kalayi A, Zahedirad M, Yazdani H, et al. Daily consumption of γ-oryzanol-fortified canola oil, compared with unfortified canola and sunflower oils, resulted in a better improvement of certain cardiometabolic biomarkers of adult subjects with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Eur J Med Res. 2023;28(1):416.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Moghtaderi F, Amiri M, Zimorovat A, Raeisi-Dehkordi H, Rahmanian M, Hosseinzadeh M, et al. The effect of canola, sesame and sesame-canola oils on body fat and composition in adults: a triple-blind, three-way randomised cross-over clinical trial. Int J Food Sciences Nutr. 2021;72(2):226-35.

  77. Bowen KJ, Kris-Etherton PM, West SG, Fleming JA, Connelly PW, Lamarche B, et al. Diets enriched with conventional or high-oleic acid canola oils lower atherogenic lipids and lipoproteins compared to a diet with a western fatty acid profile in adults with central adiposity. J Nutr. 2019;149(3):471-8.

  78. Dobrzyńska MA, Przysławski J. The effect of camelina oil (α-linolenic acid) and canola oil (oleic acid) on lipid profile, blood pressure, and anthropometric parameters in postmenopausal women. Arch Med Sci AMS. 2021;17(6):1566.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Moszak M, Zawada A, Juchacz A, Grzymisławski M, Bogdański P. Comparison of the effect of rapeseed oil or amaranth seed oil supplementation on weight loss, body composition, and changes in the metabolic profile of obese patients following 3-week body mass reduction program: a randomized clinical trial. Lipids Health Dis. 2020;19(1):1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Shahraki M, Rahati S, Keykhaei MA, Niknejad N. Comparison of canola and soybean oils on serum lipid and glucose profiles and anthropometric parameters in overweight and obese type 2 Diabetes mellitus patients: a randomized clinical trial. 2021.

  81. Kruse M, Kemper M, Gancheva S, Osterhoff M, Dannenberger D, Markgraf D, et al. Dietary rapeseed oil supplementation reduces hepatic steatosis in obese men—a randomized controlled trial. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2020;64(21): 2000419.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Tzenios N. Obesity as a risk factor for cancer. Res Dev(IJRD). 2023;8:101.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Musazadeh V, Zarezadeh M, Ghalichi F, Ahrabi SS, Jamilian P, Jamilian P, et al. Anti-obesity properties of probiotics; a considerable medical nutrition intervention: findings from an umbrella meta-analysis. Eur J Pharmacol. 2022;928: 175069.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Musazadeh V, Karimi A, Malekahmadi M, Ahrabi SS, Dehghan P. Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in the treatment of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: an umbrella systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2023;50(5):327–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Naghsh N, Moridpour AH, Kavyani Z, Musazadeh V, Jafarzadeh J, Safaei E, et al. The effect of Nigella sativa (black seed) supplementation on body weight and body composition: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Functional Foods. 2023;105: 105565.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Djoussé L, Cook NR, Kim E, Walter J, Al-Ramady OT, Luttmann-Gibson H, et al. Diabetes mellitus, race, and effects of omega-3 fatty acids on incidence of heart failure hospitalization. Heart Failure. 2022;10(4):227–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Sun L, Goh HJ, Govindharajulu P, Khee-Shing Leow M, Henry CJ. Differential effects of monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats on satiety and gut hormone responses in healthy subjects. Foods. 2019;8(12):634.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Metin ZE, Bilgic P, Tengilimoğlu Metin MM, Akkoca M. Comparing acute effects of extra virgin coconut oil and extra virgin olive oil consumption on appetite and food intake in normal-weight and obese male subjects. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(9):e0274663.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Amiri M, Raeisi-Dehkordi H, Sarrafzadegan N, Forbes SC, Salehi-Abargouei A. The effects of Canola oil on cardiovascular risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis with dose-response analysis of controlled clinical trials. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2020;30(12):2133–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Behrouz V, Yari Z. A review on differential effects of dietary fatty acids on weight, appetite and energy expenditure. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2022;62(8):2235–49.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. da Costa CAS, Carlos AS, dos Santos AdS, Monteiro AMV, de Moura EG, Nascimento-Saba CCA. Abdominal adiposity, insulin and bone quality in young male rats fed a high-fat diet containing soybean or canola oil. Clinics. 2011;66(10):1811–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Gillingham LG, Robinson KS, Jones PJ. Effect of high-oleic canola and flaxseed oils on energy expenditure and body composition in hypercholesterolemic subjects. Metabolism. 2012;61(11):1598-605.

  93. Smith-Ryan AE, Hirsch KR, Blue MN, Mock MG, Trexler ET. High-fat breakfast meal replacement in overweight and obesity: implications on body composition, metabolic markers, and satiety. Nutrients. 2019;11(4):865.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  94. Aoyama T, Nosaka N, Kasai M. Research on the nutritional characteristics of medium-chain fatty acids. J Med Invest. 2007;54(3, 4):385–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the Vice-Chancellor for Research and Technology of Kashan University of Medical Sciences and the Research Center for Biochemistry and Nutrition in Metabolic Diseases, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran.

Funding

The Vice-Chancellor for Research and Technology of Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran supported this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Center for Biochemistry and Nutrition in Metabolic Diseases, Basic Science Research Institute, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran

    Abbas Mohtashamian, Masoumeh Mahabady, Fatemeh Bagheri & Azadeh Aminianfar

  2. Department of Clinical Nutrition, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad City, Iran

    Abbas Mohtashamian & Hanieh Barghchi

  3. Student Research Committee, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad City, Iran

    Abbas Mohtashamian & Hanieh Barghchi

  4. Department of Nutritional Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad City, Iran

    Hanieh Barghchi

Authors
  1. Abbas Mohtashamian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Masoumeh Mahabady
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fatemeh Bagheri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hanieh Barghchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  5. Azadeh Aminianfar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

A.M. conceived the study. A.M. and A.A. wrote the proposal. A.M. carried out the literature search. A.M. and F.B. carried out the literature screening. A.M. and F.B. carried out data extraction and independent reviewing. A.M. and F.B. conducted the quality evaluation of the included studies. A.M. conducted data analysis and interpretation. A.M. H.B. and M.M. wrote the manuscript. A.M. and H.B. conducted the critical revision of the manuscript. All authors read the manuscript and approved it.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Azadeh Aminianfar.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mohtashamian, A., Mahabady, M., Bagheri, F. et al. Effects of canola oil on body weight and composition in adults: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of 32 randomized controlled trials. Nutr J 24, 55 (2025). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12937-025-01117-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12937-025-01117-5

Keywords

Nutrition Journal

ISSN: 1475-2891

Contact us