ArticleNutrition journal2025
Glycemic response to SSBs and ASBs: the role of mixed meals and individual variability.
Article in Nutrition journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Distinct meal timing and frequency patterns contribute to daily glycemic variability.Nutrition & diabetes · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundWhile artificially sweetened beverages (ASBs) are widely reported to have minimal glycemic impact compared to sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), their effects in mixed meal conditions and individual variability in response remain poorly understood. This study aimed to evaluate postprandial glycemic response (PPGR) and individual variability in response to an SSB (regular cola) and an ASB (zero cola), both in single and mixed conditions, using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM).
methodsA total of 66 healthy young adults participated in this 14-day, non-randomized crossover intervention study. Test meals included 75 g oral glucose load as a reference, muffin, regular cola, zero cola, muffin with regular cola (MRC), and muffin with zero cola (MZC). PPGR was evaluated using incremental area under the curve. The glucose dip was assessed as the minimum glucose reduction from baseline. Participants were classified as MZC-High (n = 17) if their glycemic response to MZC was higher than to MRC, and as MZC-Stable (n = 44) if MRC showed the higher response.
resultsThe 75 g oral glucose load reference exhibited a typical glycemic pattern, peaking at 45 min before steadily declining. The muffin induced a moderate glycemic response, while regular cola led to a rapid glucose rise followed by a sharp decline. When combined with a muffin, MRC exhibited a slightly higher glycemic response (iAUC
conclusionWhile zero cola alone or in combination with a muffin had a minimal overall glycemic impact, some individuals exhibited higher glycemic responses in mixed conditions. These findings suggest that individual variability and mixed condition should be considered when consuming artificially sweetened beverages.
trial registrationClinical Research Information Service (CRIS, cris.nih.go.kr) No. KCT0009921.
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.