Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31168050›Full record

SynthesisNutrition & diabetes2019

Effects of the resistant starch on glucose, insulin, insulin resistance, and lipid parameters in overweight or obese adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yong Wang, Jing Chen, Ying-Han Song, Rui Zhao, Lin Xia, Yi Chen, Ya-Ping Cui, Zhi-Yong Rao, Yong Zhou, Wen Zhuang and 1 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nutrition & diabetes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Probing the Therapeutic Efficacy ofBioinformatics and biology insights · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Yong WangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6002-4299
Jing ChenHealthcare-associated Infection Control Center, Sichuan Academy of Medical Science and Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Ying-Han SongDepartment of day surgery centre, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Rui ZhaoDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Lin XiaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yi ChenDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Ya-Ping CuiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Zhi-Yong RaoDepartment of Clinical Nutrition, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yong ZhouDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Wen ZhuangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xiao-Ting WuDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. wxt1@medmail.com.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe role of resistant starch (RS) in glucose, insulin, insulin resistance or sensitivity, and lipid parameters have been reported in several studies and remained controversial. A pooled analysis which assessed these parameters has not been performed. Thus, we conducted a meta-analysis to sum up existing evidence about the issue.

methodsWe searched in MEDLINE and PUBMED for studies that were published before November 2018. Meta-analysis of diabetics and nondiabetics trials were performed by use of a random-effects model.

resultsA total of 13 case-control studies that included 428 subjects with body mass index ≥25 were identified. RS supplementation reduced fasting insulin in overall and stratified (diabetics and nondiabetics trials) analysis (SMD = -0.72; 95% CI: -1.13 to -0.31; SMD = -1.26; 95% CI: -1.66 to -0.86 and SMD = -0.64; 95% CI: -1.10 to -0.18, respectively), and reduced fasting glucose in overall and stratified analysis for diabetic trials (SMD = -0.26; 95% CI: -0.5 to -0.02 and SMD = -0.28; 95% CI: -0.54 to -0.01, respectively). RS supplementation increased HOMA-S% (SMD = 1.19; 95% CI: 0.59-1.78) and reduced HOMA-B (SMD =-1.2; 95% CI: -1.64 to -0.77), LDL-c concentration (SMD =-0.35; 95% CI: -0.61 to -0.09), and HbA1c (SMD = -0.43; 95% CI: -0.74 to -0.13) in overall analysis.

conclusionsThis meta-analysis has provided evidence that RS supplementation can improve fasting glucose, fasting insulin, insulin resistance and sensitivity, especially for diabetic with overweight or obesity. However, owing to potential sophistication, individual difference and composition of intestinal microbiota, this result should be carefully taken into account.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsStarchBlood GlucoseHumansInsulinInsulin ResistanceLipidsObesityOverweightTreatment OutcomeBlood GlucoseInsulinLipidsStarch

Identifiers

PMID31168050
PMCPMC6551340

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.