Low glycaemic index, or low glycaemic load, diets for diabetes mellitus
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of diabetes management is to normalise blood glucose levels, since improved blood glucose control is associated with reduction in development, and progression, of complications. Nutritional factors affect blood glucose levels, however there is currently no universal approach to the optimal dietary treatment for diabetes. There is controversy about how useful the glycaemic index (GI) is in diabetic meal planning. Improved glycaemic control through diet could minimise medications, lessen risk of diabetic complications, improve quality of life and increase life expectancy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of low glycaemic index, or low glycaemic load, diets on glycaemic control in people with diabetes. SEARCH STRATEGY: We performed electronic searches of The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL with no language restriction. SELECTION CRITERIA: We assessed randomised controlled trials of four weeks or longer that compared a low glycaemic index, or low glycaemic load, diet with a higher glycaemic index, or load, or other diet for people with either type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus, whose diabetes was not already optimally controlled. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data on study population, intervention and outcomes for each included study, using standardised data extraction forms. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven relevant randomised controlled trials involving 402 participants were identified. There was a significant decrease in the glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) parallel group of trials, the weighted mean difference (WMD) was -0.5% with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of - 0.9 to -0.1, P = 0.02; and in the cross-over group of trials the WMD was -0.5% with a 95% CI of -1.0 to -0.1, P = 0.03. Episodes of hypoglycaemia were significantly fewer with low compared to high GI diet in one trial (difference of -0.8 episodes per patient per month, P < 0.01), and proportion of participants reporting more than 15 hyperglycaemic episodes per month was lower for low-GI diet compared to measured carbohydrate exchange diet in another study (35% versus 66%, P = 0.006). No study reported on mortality, morbidity or costs. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: A low-GI diet can improve glycaemic control in diabetes without compromising hypoglycaemic events.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Emerging evidence suggests that the effects of carbohydrate quality may be most relevant in the immediate postprandial period and among individuals more predisposed to insulin resistance.
“Emerging evidence suggests that the effects of carbohydrate quality may be most relevant in the immediate postprandial period and among individuals more predisposed to insulin resistance.129–132”
From Components of a Cardioprotective Diet: New Insights (2011) · cites this paper as [131]
Emerging and compelling evidence suggests that foods with higher glycemic responses can adversely affect blood glucose control and triglycerides and perhaps LDL cholesterol levels, inflammation, endothelial function, and fibrinolysis.
“Emerging and compelling evidence suggests that foods with higher glycemic responses can adversely affect blood glucose control and triglycerides and perhaps LDL cholesterol levels, inflammation, endothelial function, and fibrinolysis.33,129–132”
From Components of a Cardioprotective Diet: New Insights (2011) · cites this paper as [131]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 52 · Cited by 362
- Authors
- Thomas, D., & Elliott, E. J.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-01-21
- Volume
- 2010
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- CD006296-CD006296
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-1858
- PMC
- PMC6486008
- OpenAlex
- W1848142616
- Cited by
- 362
- References
- 52
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 33
- FWCI
- 3.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Food composition and properties
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
- Keywords
- low glycemic index diet, diabetes mellitus, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, glycemic control, glycated haemoglobin A1c, hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, dietary treatment of diabetes, diabetes complications prevention, quality of life, cost-effectiveness
- MeSH terms
- Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Diet, Diabetic, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Hypoglycemia, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Glycemic Index
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review