ReviewCureus2026
Carbohydrate Quality Versus Quantity in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus While Considering Randomized Dietary Interventions: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medical nutrition therapy is the first-line treatment for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), but whether carbohydrate quality or quantity should be prioritized is unclear, as dietary interventions often change amount, glycemic quality, fiber, fat, protein, and food pattern together. We systematically reviewed randomized trials of carbohydrate quality or quantity in diagnosed GDM. PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched from inception to July 19, 2026, with citation searching. Two human reviewers screened the records and extracted the data with artificial-intelligence assistance. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2), and the findings were primarily synthesized narratively using the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) approach, with limited random-effects meta-analysis for clinically compatible insulin-related outcomes. From 981 records, 34 reports representing 25 independent randomized studies were included; they differed markedly in construct, achieved carbohydrate separation, rescue treatment, and analysis population. In an exploratory, treatment-threshold analysis, lower-glycemic-index assignment reduced the proportion meeting insulin-start criteria (two trials, 159 participants; risk ratio [RR] 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-0.75), but rescue switching removed the difference in actual insulin use. Lower-carbohydrate assignment did not reduce insulin initiation (three trials, 248 participants; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.76-1.35). This finding remained essentially unchanged after excluding the trial in which the intended difference in carbohydrate intake was not achieved. With only two or three small trials per pool, I² = 0% does not indicate homogeneity. Fiber, staple-quality, and provided-diet interventions improved selected postprandial measures, but obstetric, birth-size, and neonatal-adiposity benefits were not established, and certainty was low or very low. Carbohydrate quality is a plausible route to postprandial improvement without aggressive restriction, but current randomized evidence does not establish a universal quality-over-quantity rule or support lower carbohydrate intake as superior. Carbohydrate amount should be individualized while prioritizing nutrient-dense, lower-glycemic-index, fiber-rich sources.
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.