scholarly journals Is Hypovitaminosis D Related to Incidence of Type 2 Diabetes and High Fasting Glucose Level in Healthy Subjects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

Nutrients ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shamaila Rafiq ◽  
Per Jeppesen
Author(s):  
Nasim Janbozorgi ◽  
Ramesh Allipour ◽  
Kurosh Djafarian ◽  
Sakineh Shab-Bidar ◽  
Mostafa Badeli ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. e027298
Author(s):  
Janett Barbaresko ◽  
Manuela Neuenschwander ◽  
Lukas Schwingshackl ◽  
Sabrina Schlesinger

IntroductionType 2 diabetes (T2D) is a major health concern associated with several comorbidities such as diabetic chronic kidney disease, neuropathy and cardiovascular diseases. Many of these complications may be preventable by an adequate lifestyle, including a favourable dietary behaviour, additionally to pharmacological management. In general, dietary guidelines for patients with diabetes recommend a hypocaloric diet to achieve a normal weight, but there is a lack of detailed instructions on specific nutrients and foods to prevent diabetes-related outcomes. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarise the available evidence on the association between dietary factors and health-related outcomes in patients with T2D.Methods and analysisA systematic literature search will be conducted in PubMed and Web of Science in May 2019 to identify prospective observational studies investigating dietary factors in association with major complications in patients with T2D. We will include studies investigating dietary patterns, food groups, foods, macronutrients and micronutrients as well as secondary plant compounds. As diabetes-related outcomes, we will include macrovascular (cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases) and microvascular outcomes (nephropathy, neuropathy and retinopathy), as well as cancer, quality of life, depression, cognitive disorders and mortality. We will conduct dose-response meta-analyses using random effects models. We will investigate heterogeneity across studies and publication bias. To assess the risk of bias and quality of the included studies, we will use the Cochrane risk of bias tool ROBINS-I and the quality of evidence will be assessed using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.Ethics and disseminationAs the systematic review is based on published studies, ethical considerations are not required. The systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed Journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018110669


The Lancet ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 398 ◽  
pp. S70
Author(s):  
Ana-Catarina Pinho-Gomes ◽  
Georgia Morelli ◽  
Alexandra Jones ◽  
Mark Woodward

2020 ◽  
Vol 112 (4) ◽  
pp. 1002-1014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arno Greyling ◽  
Katherine M Appleton ◽  
Anne Raben ◽  
David J Mela

ABSTRACT Background It has been suggested that low-energy sweeteners (LES) may be associated with an increased risk of metabolic diseases, possibly due to stimulation of glucose-responsive mechanisms. Objective We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of human intervention studies examining the acute effect of LES intake on postprandial glucose (PPG) and postprandial insulin (PPI) responses, in order to comprehensively and objectively quantify these relations. Methods We systematically searched the Medline, OVID FSTA, and SCOPUS databases until January 2020. Randomized controlled trials comparing acute postprandial effects on PPG and/or PPI after exposure to LES, either alone, with a meal, or with other nutrient-containing preloads to the same intervention without LES were eligible for inclusion. PPG and PPI responses were calculated as mean incremental area under the curve divided by time. Meta-analyses were performed using random effects models with inverse variance weighing. Results Twenty-six papers (34 PPG trials and 29 PPI trials) were included. There were no reports of statistically significant differences in the effects of LES on PPG and PPI responses compared with control interventions. Pooled effects of LES intake on the mean change difference in PPG and PPI were −0.02 mmol/L (95% CI: −0.09, 0.05) and −2.39 pmol/L (95% CI: −11.83, 7.05), respectively. The results did not appreciably differ by the type or dose of LES consumed, cointervention type, or fasting glucose and insulin levels. Among patients with type 2 diabetes, the mean change difference indicated a smaller PPG response after exposure to LES compared with the control (−0.3 mmol/L; 95% CI: −0.53, −0.07). Conclusions Ingestion of LES, administered alone or in combination with a nutrient-containing preload, has no acute effects on the mean change in postprandial glycemic or insulinemic responses compared with a control intervention. Apart from a small beneficial effect on PPG (−0.3 mmol/L) in studies enrolling patients with type 2 diabetes, the effects did not differ by type or dose of LES, or fasting glucose or insulin levels. This review and meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO as CRD42018099608.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document