The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Glycemic Index1
Abstract
Different starchy foods produce different glycemic responses when fed individually, and there is evidence that this also applies in the context of the mixed meal. Methods of processing, and other factors unrelated to the nutrient composition of foods may also have major effects on the glycemic response. The reason for differences in glycemic response appears to relate to the rate at which the foods are digested and the many factors influencing this. The glycemic index (GI) is a system of classification in which the glycemic responses of foods are indexed against a standard (white bread). This allows the results of different investigators to be pooled. GI values also depend upon a number of nonfood-related variables. The method of calculation of the glycemic response area is most important, but the method of blood sampling and length of time of studies also may have effects. Variability of glycemic responses arises from day-to-day variation in the same subject and variation between different subjects. There is less variability between the GI values of different subjects than there is within the same subject from day to day. Therefore, the mean GI values of foods are independent of the glucose tolerance status of the subjects being tested. Potentially clinically useful starchy foods producing relatively flat glycemic responses have been identified, including legumes, pasta, barley, bulgur, parboiled rice and whole grain breads such as pumpernickel. Specific incorporation of these foods into diets have been associated with reduced blood glucose, insulin, and lipid levels. Low-GI foods may influence amino acid metabolism although the implications of these are unknown. In addition, low GI foods increase colonic fermentation. The physiologic and metabolic implications of this relate to increased bacterial urea utilization, and to the production and absorption of short chain fatty acids in the colon. The application of the GI to therapeutic diets should be in the context of the overall nutrient composition of the diet. High-fat or high-sugar foods may have a low GI, but it may not be prudent to recommend these foods solely on the basis of the GI. It is therefore suggested that the most appropriate use of the GI is to rank the glycemic effects of starchy foods which would already have been chosen for possible inclusion in the diet on the basis of their nutritional attributes, i.e. low-fat, unrefined carbohydrate.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Dietary Fiber, Glycemic Load, and Risk of Non—insulin-dependent Diabetes Mellitus in Women
Salmerón, J. (1997) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1997.03540300040031 · Cited by 1,804
Insulin and insulin resistance:
Sowers, J. R., & Frohlich, E. D. (2004) · Medical Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/s0025-7125(03)00128-7 · Cited by 1,518
Dietary Fiber, Glycemic Load, and Risk of NIDDM in Men
Salmerón, J., Ascherio, A., Rimm, E. B., Colditz, G. A., Spiegelman, D., Jenkins, D. J., Stampfer, M. J., Wing, A. L., & Willett, W. C. (1997) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.20.4.545 · Cited by 1,426
Carbohydrates, dietary fiber, and incident type 2 diabetes in older women
Meyer, K. A., Kushi, L. H., Jacobs, D. R., Slavin, J., Sellers, T. A., & Folsom, A. R. (2000) · The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1093/ajcn/71.4.921 · Cited by 1,271
Liu, S., Willett, W. C., Stampfer, M. J., Hu, F. B., Franz, M., Sampson, L., Hennekens, C. H., & Manson, J. E. (2000) · The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1093/ajcn/71.6.1455 · Cited by 1,166
Metadata
- Authors
- Wolever, T. M. S.
- Venue
- World Review of Nutrition and Dietetics
- Publisher
- S. Karger AG
- Published
- 2015-04-20
- Volume
- 62
- Pages
- 120-185
- ISSN
- 0084-2230 (ISSN-L)
- 1662-3975
- OpenAlex
- W157679296
- Cited by
- 325
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 35.45
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Glycemic Index1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1159/000417536
- The paper
- Wolever, T. M. S. (2015). The Glycemic Index1. World Review of Nutrition and Dietetics. https://doi.org/10.1159/000417536
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.