ArticlePublic health nutrition2021
Global evaluation of the use of glycaemic impact measurements to food or nutrient intake.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Estimates of the Dietary Glycemic Index and Load in a Representative Sample of the Greek Population.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Macronutrients quality indices and risk of metabolic syndrome and its components in Iranian adults.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Article
- Perspective: Soy-based Meat and Dairy Alternatives, Despite Classification as Ultra-processed Foods, Deliver High-quality Nutrition on Par with Unprocessed or Minimally Processed Animal-based Counterparts.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2022Article
- Perspective: The Glycemic Index Falls Short as a Carbohydrate Food Quality Indicator to Improve Diet Quality.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMeasures of glycaemic impact (e.g. postprandial glucose (PPG), oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and glycaemic index (GI)) are used by government health and regulatory agencies and public health associations around the world. The objective of this global review was to identify similarities and differences in the use of glycaemic impact measures for potential considerations for harmonisation.
designA literature and internet search was conducted to identify country government agencies and health associations that provide guidance or recommendations for PPG, OGTT, GI and glycaemic load.
resultsBased on this global review, the use of GI for food labelling (e.g. low GI) is limited and its use is voluntary. The application of OGTT as a diagnostic measurement of diabetes and gestational diabetes is widely used and in a consistent manner among the different regions of the world. Time-specific (e.g. 2 h) PPG is commonly used as a target not to exceed in individuals with diabetes and gestational diabetes. PPG is used by regulatory agencies for the substantiation of food labelling. There are differences, however, among regulatory agencies in the specific measure of PPG (i.e. PPG AUC v. peak PPG). Maximum targets for 2-h PPG for individuals with diabetes and gestational diabetes, ranging between 6 and 10 mmol/l, across countries suggest a potential consideration to harmonise PPG targets.
conclusionsThere is general consistency in the use and/or target levels of glycaemic impact measures; however, there is a potential need to investigate harmonisation strategies on certain aspects of glycaemic impact measures.
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.