Cited by 19Diabetes Management and ResearchClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Dilution of the 75-g oral glucose tolerance test improves overall tolerability but not reproducibility in subjects with different body compositions

Sievenpiper, John L., Jenkins, David J.A., Josse, Robert G., Vuksan, Vladimir·2001·Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice

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

Crossref · 10.1016/s0168-8227(00)00209-6

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 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?

  • 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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

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