Evidence Hub

Effects of energy-matched low- versus high-carbohydrate diets on glycaemic control, lipid profile, and body composition in healthy adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

A. Anagnostou, E. Larumbe-Zabala, J. Fiore, Justin Roberts, F. Naclerio

European Journal of Nutrition, 2026

905 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

The comparative effects of energy-matched low-carbohydrate (LC) versus high-carbohydrate (HC) diets on metabolic and anthropometric outcomes in healthy adults remain unclear. To evaluate the effects of LC diets (≤ 44% of total daily caloric intake [TDCI] from carbohydrate) versus HC diets (≥ 45% TDCI) on fasting glycaemia, insulinaemia, blood lipids, and body composition in non-medicated, disease-free adults under energy-matched conditions. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified through systematic searches of PubMed and secondary sources up to April 2025. Eligible studies compared energy-matched dietary interventions and reported pre- and post-intervention data for fasting blood glucose (FBG), fasting insulin (FINS), blood lipids (total cholesterol [TC], HDL-cholesterol [HDL-C], LDL-cholesterol [LDL-C], triglycerides [TAG]), and/or body composition. Pooled effect sizes (Hedges’ g) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Eighteen RCTs involving 905 participants met the inclusion criteria. LC diets produced greater reductions in FBG (g = − 0.364; 95% CI − 0.709 to − 0.019; P < 0.001) and FINS (g = − 0.190; 95% CI − 0.361 to − 0.014; P = 0.034) compared with HC. TAG decreased (g = − 0.379; 95% CI − 0.540 to − 0.219; P < 0.001), and HDL-C increased (g = 0.389; 95% CI 0.229 to 0.550; P < 0.001) under LC diets. HC diets led to a greater reduction in LDL-C (g = − 0.225; 95% CI − 0.406 to − 0.043; P = 0.009). No significant…

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: 905 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