ArticleDiabetology & metabolic syndrome2026
Effects of continuous calorie restriction versus time-restricted intermittent fasting on glycemic variability in individuals with type 2 diabetes: a randomized crossover trial.
Article in Diabetology & metabolic syndrome, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundModerate caloric restriction facilitates sustained weight control and reduces the incidence of type 2 diabetes, while meal timing and prolonged fasting may augment these advantages. Additionally, advancements in diabetes technology are improving glycemic control, by targeting Glycemic Variability (GV). However, dietary intervention studies on GV remain limited. We aimed to evaluate the changes in GV following a Continuous Calorie-restricted (CCR) Diet (reducing daily energy intake by 500 kcal/day) versus Time Restricted Intermittent Fasting (TRIF) (Calorie-matched as CCR but with restricted feeding window and only two meals) among individuals with type 2 diabetes.
methodAn interventional clinical trial with a cross-over design (CTRI/2022/07/044356) was done with 51 participants between 25 and 55 years of age, with type 2 diabetes of ≤ 5 years, taking only Metformin or drug-naive, and HbA1c between 6.5 and 8% (48-64mmol/mol). A Continuous Glucose Monitor (CGM) by Abbot was used to evaluate the Time in Range (TIR), and other GV metrics at the end of both interventions.
resultsThe carry-over and treatment effects at the end of the two interventions were significantly different between the groups, with better outcomes at the end of the CCR. TIR was significantly greater following CCR (92.4 ± 5%) than following TRIF (81.4 ± 6.5%) (p = 0.001). Whereas TAR and TBR were significantly lower after CCR intervention, with a TAR of 4.6 ± 4.7% and a TBR of 2.9 ± 3.2% than after TRIF with values of 10.9 ± 8.4% and 7.7 ± 6.1% and p-value of 0.001 and 0.009, respectively.
conclusionCalorie restriction is more effective in managing GV than time restricted feeding. Calorie restriction and careful planning of macro-nutrient distribution can emerge as a useful tool for planning dietary guidelines for individuals with type 2 diabetes.
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.