Cited by 30Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Management and EducationDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Impact of advanced and basic carbohydrate counting methods on metabolic control in patients with type 1 diabetes

Souto, Débora Lopes, Zajdenverg, Lenita, Rodacki, Melanie, Rosado, Eliane Lopes·2014·Nutrition

Abstract

Objective Diets based on carbohydrate counting remain a key strategy for improving glycemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes. However, these diets may promote weight gain because of the flexibility in food choices. The aim of this study was to compare carbohydrate counting methods regarding anthropometric, biochemical, and dietary variables in individuals with type 1 diabetes, as well as to evaluate their knowledge about nutrition. Methods Participants were allocated in basic or advanced groups. After 3 mo of the nutritional counseling, dietary intake, anthropometric variables, lipemia, and glycemic control were compared between groups. A questionnaire regarding carbohydrate counting, sucrose intake, nutritional knowledge, and diabetes and nutrition taboos also was administered. Results Ten (30%) participants had already used advanced carbohydrate counting before the nutritional counseling and these individuals had a higher body mass index (BMI) (P 90% with both methods). Conclusions Advanced carbohydrate counting did not affect lipemic and glycemic control in individuals with type 1 diabetes, however, it may increase food intake, and consequently the BMI and WC, when compared to basic carbohydrate counting. Furthermore, carbohydrate counting promoted greater food flexibility.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.nut.2013.08.010

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Randomized controlled trials in adults with type 1 diabetes have shown that carbohydrate counting can improve glycemic control, quality of life, and general well-being without increases in severe hypoglycemic events, body weight, or blood lipids.

    “carbohydrate counting can improve glycemic control, quality of life, and general well-being”

    From ESPEN guideline on hospital nutrition (2021) · cites this paper as [172]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Souto, D. L., Zajdenverg, L., Rodacki, M., & Rosado, E. L.
Affiliations
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (BR)
Venue
Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-03
Volume
30
Issue
3
Pages
286-290
ISSN
0899-9007 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2090130890
Cited by
30
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
0.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
type 1 diabetes, carbohydrate counting, glycemic control, nutrition counseling, body mass index, waist circumference, dietary fat intake, nutrition knowledge, weight gain, lipemia
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Blood Glucose, Energy Intake, Counseling, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Diet, Dietary Carbohydrates, Dietary Fats, Dietary Proteins, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Cholesterol, HDL, Cholesterol, LDL, Male, Nutritional Status, Surveys and Questionnaires, Diet Records, Body Mass Index, Waist Circumference, Young Adult, Nutritionists

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