Cited by 109Food composition and propertiesDiet, Metabolism, and DiseasePotato Plant Research

Determination of glycaemic index; some methodological aspects related to the analysis of carbohydrate load and characteristics of the previous evening meal

Granfeldt, Y, Wu, X, Björck, I·2006·European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Objectives To determine the possible differences in glycaemic index (GI) depending on (1) the analytical method used to calculate the 'available carbohydrate' load, that is, using carbohydrates by difference (total carbohydrate by difference, minus dietary fibre (DF)) as available carbohydrates vs available starch basis (total starch minus resistant starch (RS)) of a food rich in intrinsic RS and (2) the effect of GI characteristics and/or the content of indigestible carbohydrates (RS and DF) of the evening meal prior to GI testing the following morning. Design Blood glucose and serum insulin responses were studied after subjects consuming (1) two levels of barley kernels rich in intrinsic RS (15.2%, total starch basis) and (2) after a standard breakfast following three different evening meals varying in GI and/or indigestible carbohydrates: pasta, barley kernels and white wheat bread, respectively. Subjects Healthy adults with normal body mass index. Results (1) Increasing the portion size of barley kernels from 79.6 g (50 g 'available carbohydrates') to 93.9 g (50 g available starch) to adjust for its RS content did not significantly affect the GI or insulin index (11). (2) The low GI barley evening meal, as opposed to white wheat bread and pasta evening meals, reduced the postprandial glycaemic and insulinaemic (23 and 29%, respectively, P Conclusion (1) Increasing portion size to compensate for the considerable portion of RS in a low GI barley product had no significant i…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602273

Cites

38 of 38 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Granfeldt, Y., Wu, X., & Björck, I.
Affiliations
Lund University (SE)
Corresponding author
Granfeldt, Y
Venue
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Published
2005-10-05
Volume
60
Issue
1
Pages
104-112
ISSN
  • 0954-3007 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5640
OpenAlex
W2080393716
Cited by
109
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 5
FWCI
7.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Food composition and properties
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diet, Metabolism, and Disease
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Potato Plant Research
Keywords
glycemic index, insulin index, resistant starch, dietary fiber, portion size, postprandial blood glucose, postprandial insulin, barley kernels, white wheat bread, pasta, non-digestible carbohydrates
MeSH terms
Adult, Biological Availability, Blood Glucose, Edible Grain, Dietary Carbohydrates, Dietary Fiber, Digestion, Female, Food Analysis, Humans, Insulin, Intestinal Absorption, Male, Nutritive Value, Starch, Postprandial Period, Area Under Curve, 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