Cited by 48Food composition and propertiesDiet, Metabolism, and DiseaseConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling

The Glycemic Load Estimated from the Glycemic Index Does Not Differ Greatly from That Measured Using a Standard Curve in Healthy Volunteers

Open access
Venn, Bernard J, Wallace, Alison J, Monro, John A, Perry, Tracy, Brown, Rachel, Frampton, Chris, Green, Tim J·2006·The Journal of Nutrition

Abstract

Glycemic load (GL) is calculated indirectly as glycemic index (GI) times the weight of available carbohydrate. Alternatively, GL may be measured directly using a standard glucose curve. The purpose of this study was to test the agreement between GL values obtained using direct and indirect methods of measurement in 20 healthy volunteers. A standard curve in which glucose dose was plotted against blood glucose incremental area under the curve (iAUC) was generated using beverages containing 0, 12.5, 25, 50, and 75 g glucose. The GI and available carbohydrate content of 5 foods were measured. The foods (white bread, fruit bread, granola bar, instant potato, and chickpeas) were consumed in 3 portion sizes, yielding 15 food/portion size combinations. GL was determined directly by relating the iAUC of a test food to the glucose standard curve. For 12 of 15 food/portion size combinations, GL determined using GI x available carbohydrate did not differ from GL measured from the standard curve (P > 0.05). For 3 of the test products (100 g white bread, and 100- and 150-g granola bars), GI x available carbohydrate was higher than the direct measure. Benefits of the direct measure are that the method does not require testing for available carbohydrate and it allows portion sizes to be tested. For practical purposes, GI x available carbohydrate provided a good estimate of GL, at least under circumstances in which available carbohydrate was measured, and GI and GL were tested in the same gr…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jn/136.5.1377

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Venn, B. J., Wallace, A. J., Monro, J. A., Perry, T., Brown, R., Frampton, C., & Green, T. J.
Affiliations
University of Otago (NZ)
Corresponding author
Venn, Bernard J
Venue
The Journal of Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-05
Volume
136
Issue
5
Pages
1377-1381
ISSN
0022-3166 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1960829014
Cited by
48
References
4
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of 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 › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Keywords
glycemic load, glycemic index, incremental area under the curve, available carbohydrates, measurement agreement, portion size, white bread, granola bars, chickpea, healthy volunteers
MeSH terms
Blood Glucose, Bread, Dietary Carbohydrates, Female, Humans, Male, Solanum tuberosum, Reference Values, Reproducibility of Results, Cicer, 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