ReviewNutrients2011
Perceived barriers to application of glycaemic index: valid concerns or lost in translation?
Review in Nutrients, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
The Effect of a Low GI Diet on Maternal and Neonatal Markers of Glycaemic Control and Postpartum Diabetes Risk SUBSTUDY The Effect of a Low GI Diet on Postpartum Markers of Oxidation in Breast Milk of Women With Gestational Hyperglycaemia
Adapting a National Glycemic Index Education Platform for Nova Scotian Patients and Clinicians Treating Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Using Distance Education Strategies.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Dietary management practices for type 1 diabetes mellitus by dietitians in KwaZulu-Natal.Health SA = SA Gesondheid · 2021Article
- Evaluation of Glycemic Index Education in People Living with Type 2 Diabetes: Participant Satisfaction, Knowledge Uptake, and Application.Nutrients · 2020Article
- Glycemic Index and Insulinemic Index of Foods: An Interlaboratory Study Using the ISO 2010 Method.Nutrients · 2019Article
- Healthy Eating and Active Living for Diabetes-Glycemic Index (HEALD-GI): Protocol for a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2019Article
- Effect of ethnicity on glycaemic index: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Nutrition & diabetes · 2015Article
- Type 1 diabetes mellitus and gluten induced disorders.Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench · 2014Review
- Dietary glycemic index during pregnancy is associated with biomarkers of the metabolic syndrome in offspring at age 20 years.PloS one · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The term glycaemic-index (GI) originally appeared in the literature in the early 1980s. GI categorizes carbohydrate according to glycaemic effect postprandially. Since its inception, GI has obtained and maintained interest of academics and clinicians globally. Upon review of GI literature, it becomes clear that the clinical utility of GI is a source of controversy. Can and should GI be applied clinically? There are academics and clinicians on both sides of the argument. Certainly, this controversy has been a stimulus for the evolution of GI methodology and application research, but may also negatively impact clinicians' perception of GI if misunderstood. This article reviews two assessments of GI that are often listed as barriers to application; the GI concept is (1) too complex and (2) too difficult for clients to apply. The literature reviewed does not support the majority of purported barriers, but does indicate that there is a call from clinicians for more and improved GI education tools and clinician GI education. The literature indicates that the Registered Dietitian (RD) can play a key role in GI knowledge translation; from research to application. Research is warranted to assess GI education tool and knowledge needs of clinicians and the clients they serve.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.