Cited by 30Gestational Diabetes Research and ManagementDiabetes Management and ResearchNutritional Studies and Diet

Relationship of the Frequency, Distribution, and Content of Meals/Snacks to Glycaemic Control in Gestational Diabetes: The myfood24 GDM Pilot Study

Open access
Morris, Michelle A., Hutchinson, Jayne, Gianfrancesco, Carla, Alwan, Nisreen A., Carter, Michelle C., Scott, Eleanor M., Cade, Janet E.·2019·Nutrients

Abstract

This study examines nutritional intakes in Gestational diabetes mellitus piloting the myfood24 tool, to explore frequency of meals/snacks, and daily distribution of calories and carbohydrates in relation to glycaemic control. A total of 200 women aged 20–43 years were recruited into this prospective observational study between February 2015 and February 2016. Diet was assessed using myfood24, a novel online 24-h dietary recall tool. Out of 200 women 102 completed both ≥1 dietary recalls and all blood glucose measurements. Blood glucose was self-measured as part of usual care. Differences between groups meeting and exceeding glucose targets in relation to frequency of meal/snack consumption and nutrients were assessed using chi-squared and Mann–Whitney tests. Women achieving a fasting glucose target <5.3 mmol/L, compared to those exceeding it, consumed three meals (92% vs. 78%: p = 0.04) and three snacks (10% vs. 4%: p = 0.06) per day, compared with two or less; and in relation to evening snacks, consumed a higher percentage of daily energy (6% vs. 5%: p = 0.03) and carbohydrates (8% vs. 6%: p = 0.01). Achieving glycaemic control throughout the day was positively associated with snacking (p = 0.008). Achieving glucose targets was associated with having more snacks across the day, and may be associated with frequency and distribution of meals and nutrients. A larger study is required to confirm this.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/nu12010003

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In a prospective observational study using the 24 h online diet and glycemic tool "Myfood24 GDM", better glycemic control was demonstrated with more frequent meals.

    “In a prospective observational study using the 24 h online diet and glycemic tool (“Myfood24 GDM”), better glycemic control was demonstrated with more frequent meals [75].”

    From Gestational Diabetes Mellitus—Recent Literature Review (2022) · cites this paper as [75]

    Results §3.2 reports that women meeting the fasting glucose target were more likely to eat three meals rather than fewer (92% vs. 78%; p = 0.04). But the paper’s stated significance threshold was p < 0.01, and its clearer association with control throughout the day concerned snacking, not meal frequency. The claim overstates the evidence for better overall glycaemic control with more frequent meals. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Morris, M. A., Hutchinson, J., Gianfrancesco, C., Alwan, N. A., Carter, M. C., Scott, E. M., & Cade, J. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Morris, Michelle A.
Venue
Nutrients
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2019-12-18
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
3
ISSN
2072-6643 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2996455392
Cited by
30
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 1
FWCI
5.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nutrients (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • NIHR Clinical Research Network (.)
  • Medical Research Council (G1100235)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
Keywords
gestational diabetes mellitus, glycemic control, meal frequency, snacking, dietary intake, 24-hour dietary recall, glycemic targets, carbohydrate allocation, energy distribution
MeSH terms
Adult, Blood Glucose, Energy Intake, Diet, Feeding Behavior, Female, Humans, Pilot Projects, Pregnancy, Prospective Studies, Nutrition Assessment, Diabetes, Gestational, Young Adult, Meals, Snacks

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