Evidence Hub

A Low-Fat Dietary Pattern and Diabetes: A Secondary Analysis From the Women’s Health Initiative Dietary Modification Trial

B. Howard, A. Aragaki, L. Tinker, M. Allison, M. Hingle, Karen C. Johnson, J. Manson, A. Shadyab et al.

Diabetes Care, 2017

48,835 participants · 35 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE We performed a secondary analysis to evaluate the effect of the Women’s Health Initiative dietary intervention on incident diabetes and diabetes treatment in postmenopausal women. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A total of 48,835 women were randomized to a comparison group or an intervention group that underwent a behavioral/nutritional modification program to decrease fat and increase vegetable, fruit, and grain intake for an average of 8.1 years. Ninety-three percent of participants completed the intervention, and 71% participated in active follow-up through 30 September 2015 (median 17.3 years). We measured time to development of treated diabetes and progression from oral antihyperglycemic agents to insulin. Serum glucose and insulin were measured in a subsample of women (N = 2,324) at baseline and years 1, 3, and 6. RESULTS During the trial, intervention group women had lower rates of initiation of insulin therapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74 [95% CI 0.59, 0.94]; P = 0.01). Moreover, women with baseline waist circumference ≥88 cm (P interaction = 0.01) and worse metabolic syndrome scores (P interaction = 0.02) had the greatest reduction in risk of initiating insulin therapy. The decreased risk from the intervention was present during the cumulative follow-up (HR 0.88 [95% CI 0.78, 0.99]; P = 0.04). In participants with measured biomarkers (5.8% subsample) who had baseline glucose <100 mg/dL, the intervention reduced the risk of developing glucose ≥100 mg/dL by 25% (odds…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 48,835 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free