Evidence Hub

Effect of Dietary Approaches on Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review with Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Tian-Tian Jing, Shunxing Zhang, Mayangzong Bai, Zhongwan Chen, Si-Han Gao, Si-Si Li, Jing Zhang

Nutrients, 2023

4,809 participants · 90 citations

Abstract

Background: Dietary patterns play a critical role in diabetes management, while the best dietary pattern for Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) patients is still unclear. The aim of this network meta-analysis was to compare the impacts of various dietary approaches on the glycemic control of T2DM patients. Methods: Relevant studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Knowledge, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and other additional records (1949 to 31 July 2022). Eligible RCTs were those comparing different dietary approaches against each other or a control diet in individuals with T2DM for at least 6 months. We assessed the risk of bias of included studies with the Cochrane risk of bias tool and confidence of estimates with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach for network meta-analyses. In order to determine the pooled effect of each dietary approach relative to each other, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) for interventions for both HbA1c and fasting glucose, which enabled us to estimate the relative intervention effects by combing both direct and indirect trial evidence. Results: Forty-two RCTs comprising 4809 patients with T2DM were included in the NMA, comparing 10 dietary approaches (low-carbohydrate, moderate-carbohydrate, ketogenic, low-fat, high-protein, Mediterranean, Vegetarian/Vegan, low glycemic index, recommended, and control diets). In total, 83.3% of the studies were at a lower risk of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 4,809 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