Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Human Studies to Support a Quantitative Recommendation for Whole Grain Intake in Relation to Type 2 Diabetes
Chanson-Rolle A, Meynier A, Aubin F, Lappi J, Poutanen K, Vinoy S, Braesco V
PloS one · 56 citations
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Meta-analysis (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Clinical events such as disease or death
- Intake measured by
- Not stated
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Industry funded
- Government
- Academy of Finland
- Authors
- At least one author declares a financial tie to industry
Based on 1 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2015-06-22 · PLoS One · vol. 10 · issue 6 · p. e0131377
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science
- Cited
- 93 citations · more than 87% of similar papers · 2.1× the field average
- References
- 34 works
- Access
- Open access (journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Food composition and properties · Celiac Disease Research and Management · Nutritional Studies and Diet
- Keywords
- Whole grains, Observational study, Refined grains, Meta-analysis, Type 2 diabetes, Medicine, Consumption (sociology), Meta-regression, Environmental health, Linear regression, Quantitative assessment, Exposure assessment, Regression analysis, Ingredient, Food science, Statistics, Diabetes mellitus, Mathematics, Biology, Internal medicine, Endocrinology, Pathology, Risk analysis (engineering)
- MeSH
- humans, diabetes mellitus, type 2, nutrition policy, whole grains
7 authors
From FI
- Aurélie Chanson‐Rollé
- Alexandra Meynier · corresponding
- François Aubin
- Jenni LappiUniversity of Eastern Finland
- Kaisa S PoutanenUniversity of Eastern Finland; VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
- Sophie Vinoy
Abstract
Background
Due to the increasing evidence of their health benefits, whole grains are recommended for consumption worldwide. Such recommendations are, however, rarely quantitative. Our aim was to perform a quantitative evaluation of the relationship between whole grain consumption and the occurrence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) to support a recommendation on the daily consumption of whole grains.
Methods and findings
We conducted a systematic review by searching three bibliographic databases. We included human studies addressing the relationship between whole grain consumption and T2D occurrence, and providing quantitative information on daily intake of whole grains. A dose-response meta-regression analysis between whole grain intake and T2D occurrence was performed, using a hierarchical mixed least square linear regression model. Eight observational studies were included (all but one prospective), with a total of 15,573 cases of T2D among 316,051 participants. Quantitative meta-regression demonstrated a significant linear inverse relationship between whole grain intake and T2D occurrence (P<0.0001), with an overall absolute reduction of 0.3% in the T2D rate for each additional 10 g of whole grain ingredient consumed daily. The association persisted when adjusted on sex, age, country, study design, follow up duration, and mode of report of whole grain intakes (as foods or ingredients).
Conclusions
The meta-regression model made it possible to estimate the decrease in T2D risk corresponding to various changes in whole grain intakes, and the results contribute to setting up quantitative recommendations. For instance, consuming three servings of whole grain foods (45 g of whole grain ingredients) daily would induce a 20% relative reduction in the T2D risk as compared to consuming a half serving (7.5 g of whole grain ingredients). These results should be considered for future recommendations, by considering the actual whole grain intake of the concerned populations. The systematic review protocol was published on the PROSPERO register (CRD42013006925).
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.