ArticlePublic health nutrition2017
A Japanese diet with low glycaemic index and glycaemic load is associated with both favourable and unfavourable aspects of dietary intake patterns in three generations of women.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Estimates of the Dietary Glycemic Index and Load in a Representative Sample of the Greek Population.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Dietary glycemic index, glycemic load and mortality: Japan Public Health Center-based prospective study.European journal of nutrition · 2021Article
- Article
- Dietary glycemic index, glycemic load, and endometrial cancer risk: The Japan Public Health Center-based Prospective Study.Cancer science · 2021Article
- Higher dietary glycemic index, but not glycemic load, is associated with a lower prevalence of depressive symptoms in a cross-sectional study of young and middle-aged Japanese women.European journal of nutrition · 2018Article
- Higher dietary acid load is associated with a higher prevalence of frailty, particularly slowness/weakness and low physical activity, in elderly Japanese women.European journal of nutrition · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWestern studies have suggested cultural differences in food and nutrient intake patterns associated with dietary glycaemic index (GI) and glycaemic load (GL). Here, we conducted a cross-sectional study to examine the GI and GL of Japanese diets in relation to food and nutrient intakes.
designDietary intake was assessed using a validated, self-administered, diet history questionnaire.
settingA total of thirty-five of forty-seven prefectures in Japan. SUBJECTS: Young (age 18 years), middle-aged (mean age 48 years) and older (mean age 74 years) Japanese women (n 3961, 3800 and 2202, respectively).
resultsIrrespective of age, a positive association with dietary GI was seen for white rice only, which contributed most (37-42 %) to the variation in dietary GI. Conversely, all other food groups (such as fruit and vegetable juice, dairy products, noodles and fruit) were negative predictors of dietary GI. For dietary GL, 95-96 % of variation was explained by carbohydrate-rich food groups, all of which were positive predictors of GL. After adjustment for potential confounding factors, only carbohydrate intake was positively associated with dietary GI and GL, irrespective of age. Conversely, dietary GI and GL were inversely associated with intakes of all other nutrients examined (including SFA and Na).
conclusionsA low-GI and -GL diet, which was characterized principally by a low intake of white rice, was associated with both favourable (higher intakes of dietary fibre and key vitamins and minerals) and unfavourable (higher intakes of SFA and Na) aspects of dietary intake patterns in three generations of Japanese women.
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.