Effects of whole grains on glycemic control: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies and randomized controlled trials
Ying T, Zheng J, Kan J, Li W, Xue K, Du J, Liu Y, He G
Nutrition journal · 22 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
- Independent funding
- Government
- National Natural Science Foundation of China
- Government
- Shanghai Pujiang Program
- Authors
- At least one author declares a financial tie to industry
- Grants
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (81861138007)
Based on 2 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2024-04-25 · Nutr J · vol. 23 · issue 1 · p. 47
- Publisher
- BioMed Central
- Cited
- 23 citations · more than 91% of similar papers · 2.5× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 78 works
- Access
- Open access (journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Food composition and properties · Celiac Disease Research and Management · Phytoestrogen effects and research
- Keywords
- Medicine, Glycemic, Internal medicine, Type 2 diabetes, Diabetes mellitus, Meta-analysis, Prospective cohort study, Randomized controlled trial, Clinical nutrition, Cochrane Library, Cohort study, Relative risk, Cohort, Endocrinology, Insulin, Confidence interval
- MeSH
- humans, diabetes mellitus, type 2, insulin, blood glucose, diet, prospective studies, randomized controlled trials as topic, whole grains, glycemic control, glycated hemoglobin
8 authors
From CN, KR
- Tao YingFudan University
- Jianheng Zheng
- Juntao Kan
- Wenyun LiFudan University
- Kun XueFudan University
- Jun Du
Abstract
Purpose
Whole grains have recently been promoted as beneficial to diabetes prevention. However, the evidence for the glycemic benefits of whole grains seems to conflict between the cohort studies and randomized control trials (RCTs). To fill the research gap, we conducted a meta-analysis to determine the effects of whole grains on diabetes prevention and to inform recommendations.
Methods
We searched PubMed, Clarivate Web of Science, and Cochrane Library until March 2024. We used the risk ratio (RR) of type 2 diabetes to represent the clinical outcomes for cohort studies, while the biomarkers, including fasting blood glucose and insulin, HbA1C, and HOMA-IR, were utilized to show outcomes for RCTs. Dose-response relationships between whole grain intakes and outcomes were tested with random effects meta-regression models and restricted cubic splines models. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021281639.
Results
Ten prospective cohort studies and 37 RCTs were included. Cohort studies suggested a 50 g/day whole grain intake reduced the risk of type 2 diabetes (RR = 0.761, 95% CI: 0.700 to 0.828, I2 = 72.39%, P 2 = 72.99%, P 1C (MD = -0.662 mmol/mol (-0.06%), 95% CI: -1.335 to 0.010; I2 = 64.55%, P = 0.05) and HOMA-IR (MD = -0.164, 95% CI: -0.342 to 0.013; I2 = 33.38%, P = 0.07). The intake of whole grains and FBG, HbA1C, and HOMA-IR were significantly dose-dependent. The restricted spline curves remained flat up to 150 g/day and decreased afterward. Subgroup analysis showed that interventions with multiple whole-grain types were more effective than those with a single type.
Conclusion
Our study findings suggest that a daily intake of more than 150 g of whole grain ingredients is recommended as a population approach for diabetes prevention.
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.