Cited by 227Food composition and propertiesDiet, Metabolism, and DiseaseNatural Antidiabetic Agents Studies

Effect of the glycemic index and content of indigestible carbohydrates of cereal-based breakfast meals on glucose tolerance at lunch in healthy subjects

Open access
Liljeberg, Helena GM, Åkerberg, Anna KE, Björck, Inger ME·1999·The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Background Diets with a low glycemic index (GI) have been shown to improve glucose tolerance in both healthy and diabetic subjects. Two potential mechanisms are discussed in relation to long-term metabolic effects: a decreased demand for insulin in the postprandial phase and formation of short-chain fatty acids from fermentation of indigestible carbohydrates in the colon. Objective The objective was to study the effect of the GI and the indigestible carbohydrate--resistant starch (RS) and dietary fiber (DF)--content of cereal-based breakfasts on glucose tolerance at a second meal (lunch) in healthy subjects. Design The effects of 7 test breakfasts with known GIs (GI: 52-99) and RS + DF contents (2-36 g) were evaluated. White-wheat bread was used as a reference breakfast (high GI, low RS + DF content). Glucose and insulin responses after the second meal were measured in healthy subjects. In addition, the satiating capacity of 4 of the 7 test breakfasts was estimated before and during the second meal. Results Two of the 4 low-GI breakfasts improved glucose tolerance at the second meal. Only these 2 breakfasts were capable of postponing the in-between-meal fasting state. There was no measurable effect of fermentable carbohydrates on glucose tolerance at the second meal. The highest satiety score was associated with the barley breakfast that had a low GI and a high RS + DF content. Conclusions Glucose tolerance can improve in a single day. Slow absorption and digestion of starch…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ajcn/69.4.647

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Similar conclusions were drawn from second-meal experiments by Liljeberg et al.

    “Similar conclusions were drawn from second-meal experiments done by Liljeberg et al. (1999).”

    From Glycaemic index methodology (2005) · cites this paper as Liljeberg et al. (1999)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liljeberg, H. G., Åkerberg, A. K., & Björck, I. M.
Affiliations
Lund University (SE)
Corresponding author
Liljeberg, Helena GM
Venue
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1999-04
Volume
69
Issue
4
Pages
647-655
ISSN
0002-9165 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1935646974
Cited by
227
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 7
FWCI
5.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Food composition and properties
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diet, Metabolism, and Disease
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Natural Antidiabetic Agents Studies
Keywords
glycemic index, resistant starch, dietary fiber, non-digestible carbohydrates, glucose tolerance, insulin response, satiety, barley, white wheat bread, short-chain fatty acids, starch hydrolysis
MeSH terms
Adult, Hordeum, Edible Grain, Dietary Carbohydrates, Dietary Fiber, Digestion, Eating, Fasting, Female, Glucose, Humans, Insulin, Male, Middle Aged, Satiation, Sweden, Triticum, Postprandial Period

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