Cited by 821Diet and metabolism studiesNutritional Studies and DietDiabetes Treatment and Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 79 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 29 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of different dietary approaches to the management of type 2 diabetes

Open access
Ajala, Olubukola, English, Patrick, Pinkney, Jonathan·2013·The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Background There is evidence that reducing blood glucose concentrations, inducing weight loss, and improving the lipid profile reduces cardiovascular risk in people with type 2 diabetes.Objective We assessed the effect of various diets on glycemic control, lipids, and weight loss.Design We conducted searches of PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar to August 2011. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with interventions that lasted ≥6 mo that compared low-carbohydrate, vegetarian, vegan, low-glycemic index (GI), high-fiber, Mediterranean, and high-protein diets with control diets including low-fat, high-GI, American Diabetes Association, European Association for the Study of Diabetes, and low-protein diets.Results A total of 20 RCTs were included (n = 3073 included in final analyses across 3460 randomly assigned individuals). The low-carbohydrate, low-GI, Mediterranean, and high-protein diets all led to a greater improvement in glycemic control [glycated hemoglobin reductions of -0.12% (P = 0.04), -0.14% (P = 0.008), -0.47% (P < 0.00001), and -0.28% (P < 0.00001), respectively] compared with their respective control diets, with the largest effect size seen in the Mediterranean diet. Low-carbohydrate and Mediterranean diets led to greater weight loss [-0.69 kg (P = 0.21) and -1.84 kg (P < 0.00001), respectively], with an increase in HDL seen in all diets except the high-protein diet.Conclusion Low-carbohydrate, low-GI, Mediterranean, and high-protein diets are effective in improving various markers of cardiovascular risk in people with diabetes and should be considered in the overall strategy of diabetes management.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3945/ajcn.112.042457

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 29 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 35 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 36
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 13
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 12
55 of 55
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There is limited evidence on the optimal dietary approach to control hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes.

    “However, there is limited evidence on the optimal dietary approach to control hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes (T2D) 4 .”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The ideal proportion of carbohydrate, fat, and protein that should be recommended remains unclear.

    “but the ideal proportion of the 3 main food components (carbohydrate, fat, and protein) that should be recommended remains unclear.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There is insufficient evidence to justify current recommendations for macronutrient intake in type 2 diabetes.

    “However, there is insufficient evidence to justify these recommendations.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    No systematic review or meta-analysis has compared the effects of different categories of dietary intervention on glycemic control, weight loss, and lipids in type 2 diabetes.

    “To our knowledge, there is no systematic review or meta-analysis that has compared the effects of different categories of dietary intervention on glycemic control, weight loss, and lipids in T2D.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Weight change independently affects glycemic control and lipid profile.

    “Another major confounder was the independent effect of weight change on the other measured variables (glycemic control and lipid profile).”
5 of 5

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?

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • A low-GI trial is cited as a low-carbohydrate trial

    Minor

    Study 39 is counted among the pooled low-carbohydrate studies, but the paper describes its intervention as low GI with an ADA-diet control.

  • Vegan trial is assigned the Mediterranean trial's citation

    Minor

    The text calls the vegan-diet study Barnard et al (36), but elsewhere assigns the vegan comparison to reference 29; reference 36 is identified as a Mediterranean-diet trial.

  • Yancy study is given Samaha's reference number

    Minor

    The text identifies Yancy et al as study 32, whereas the trial summary identifies study 32 as Samaha.

  • Study 30 is listed as both included and excluded from meta-analysis

    Minor

    The duration summary identifies study 30 among the studies in the quantitative analysis, while the exclusions section lists it among studies excluded from meta-analyses.

4 of 4

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 79 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. 1999, Guidelines for the nutritional management of diabetes mellitus in the new millennium: a position statement by the Canadian Diabetes Association, Can J Diabetes Care, 23, 56

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 821

Metadata

Authors
Ajala, O., English, P., & Pinkney, J.
Affiliations
  • Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry (GB)
  • Derriford Hospital (GB)
Venue
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-03
Volume
97
Issue
3
Pages
505-516
ISSN
0002-9165 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2099244083
Cited by
821
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 64 · 2021: 60 · 2020: 120 · 2019: 58 · 2018: 78 · 2017: 71 · 2016: 70 · 2015: 60 · 2014: 66 · 2013: 34
FWCI
8.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Diet and metabolism studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, dietary intervention, glycemic control, HbA1c, low-carbohydrate diet, Mediterranean diet, low glycemic index diet, high-protein diet, weight loss, lipid profile, HDL cholesterol, cardiovascular risk, vegetarian diet, vegan diet, high-fiber diet
MeSH terms
Blood Glucose, Energy Intake, Cardiovascular Diseases, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Dietary Carbohydrates, Dietary Fats, Dietary Fiber, Dietary Proteins, Humans, Lipids, Risk Factors, Diet, Vegetarian, Weight Loss, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Diet, Fat-Restricted, Diet, Protein-Restricted, Glycemic Index, Diet, Mediterranean, Diet, Carbohydrate-Restricted

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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