Dilution of the 75-g oral glucose tolerance test improves overall tolerability but not reproducibility in subjects with different body compositions
Abstract
Poor reproducibility of the 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (75-g OGTT) is a major criticism. To test whether dilution might be a contributor, we studied the effect of administering it at 300, 600, and 900 ml on the coefficient of variation (CV) and overall tolerability. Each dilution was randomly repeated three times by 35 subjects: 11 lean (body fat [BF]: 11.5+/-1.5%, body mass index (BMI): 24.1+/-0.8 kg/m(2), age: 33+/-3 years), 12 normal (BF: 24.3+/-1.3%, BMI: 23.9+/-0.7 kg/m2, age: 33+/-3 years), and 12 obese (BF: 34.1+/-1.5%, BMI: 34.5+/-1.6 kg/m(2), age: 41+/-4 years). The protocol followed, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines with venous samples drawn at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, and 120 min. Scales assessing palatability, acceptability, satiety, nausea, and dizziness were also completed. No differences were detected in CV between the three dilutions at the 2 h-diagnostic-endpoint in any group. CV for glycemia, however, was lower for the 300-ml OGTT (10+/-2.1%) than either the 600 ml (17.9+/-2.1%) or 900-ml OGTT (19.9+/-4.4%) at 45 min in the lean group (P<0.05). CV for insulinemia was lower for the 300 ml (30.6+/-4.5%) and 600 ml (30.6+/-4.1%) OGTT than the 900-ml OGTT (53.7+/-7.9%) at 60 min in the obese group (P<0.05). When affective ratings were compared, the 600-ml OGTT scored highest on palatability and acceptability (P<0.05). We concluded that the dilution of the 75-g OGTT improves the overall tolerability but not reproducibility of results. Practi…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Other studies have observed or indicated a relationship between the volume of water or food and postprandial responses, including incremental areas.
“whereas others observed or indicate a relationship between the volume of water or food and postprandial responses, and sometimes incremental areas (Torsdottir & Anderson, 1989;Young & Wolever, 1998;Sievenpiper et al. 2001).”
From Glycaemic index methodology (2005) · cites this paper as Sievenpiper et al. 2001
Cites
Mooy, J. M., Grootenhuis, P. A., de Vries, H., Kostense, P. J., Popp-Snijders, C., Bouter, L. M., & Heine, R. J. (1996) · Diabetologia · doi:10.1007/bf00418345 · Cited by 344 · see citing works
Wolever, T. M. S., Chiasson, J.-L., Csima, A., Hunt, J. A., Palmason, C., Ross, S. A., & Ryan, E. A. (1998) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.21.3.336 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Torsdottir, I., & Andersson, H. (1989) · Diabetologia · doi:10.1007/bf00285289 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Brouns, F., Bjorck, I., Frayn, K. N., Gibbs, A. L., Lang, V., Slama, G., & Wolever, T. M. S. (2005) · Nutrition Research Reviews · doi:10.1079/nrr2005100 · Cited by 1,061 · see citing works
- Authors
- Sievenpiper, J. L., Jenkins, D. J. A., Josse, R. G., & Vuksan, V.
- Affiliations
- University of Toronto (CA)
- St. Michael's Hospital (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Vuksan, Vladimir
- Venue
- Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2001-02
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 87-95
- ISSN
- 0168-8227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2083972850
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2
- FWCI
- 0.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
- Keywords
- oral glucose tolerance test, reproducibility, coefficient of variation, tolerability, body composition, obesity, lean subjects, glycemia, insulin levels, palatability, satiety, nausea, dizziness, fat mass, body mass index, diabetes diagnosis, test standardization, American Diabetes Association guidelines, 75 g OGTT
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Affect, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Glucose Tolerance Test, Humans, Insulin, Obesity, Reference Values, Thinness, United States, Voluntary Health Agencies, Reproducibility of Results, Body Mass Index, Guidelines as Topic
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