Comparative efficacy of different eating patterns in the management of type 2 diabetes and prediabetes: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Ben-tuo Zeng, Hui-qing Pan, Feng-dan Li, Zhen-yu Ye, Yang Liu, Ji-wei Du
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.05.30.22275766

Abstract

The study aimed to compare and rank the efficacy of various eating patterns for glycemic control, anthropometrics, and serum lipid profiles in the management of type 2 diabetes and prediabetes, and provide evidence for personalized clinical decision-making. We conducted a network meta-analysis using arm-based Bayesian methods and random effect models following the Cochrane handbook. We drew the conclusions using the partially contextualized framework by the GRADE working group. Twelve English and Chinese databases and registers were retrieved, and we obtained 9,534 references, of which 107 independent studies were eligible, including 8,909 participants, ten experimental diets, and thirteen outcome variables. The meta-analysis denoted that: caloric restriction was ranked as the best pattern for weight loss (SUCRA 86.8%) and reducing waist circumference (82.2%), high-fiber diets for lowering fasting plasma glucose (82.1%) and insulin (79.4%), Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension for reducing glycated hemoglobin (90.5%) and systolic blood pressure (87.9%), simple high-protein diets for improving insulin resistance (86.3%) and diastolic blood pressure (74.6%), low-carbohydrate diets for improving body mass index (81.6%) and high-density lipoprotein (84.0%), low-glycemic-index diets for lowering total cholesterol (87.5%) and low-density lipoprotein (86.6%), and Paleolithic diets for reducing triacylglycerol (83.4%). However, the results were of moderate sensitivity, and publication bias of glycated hemoglobin, weight, and body mass index existed. Meta-regression suggested that macronutrients, energy intake, baseline, and weight may modify outcomes differently, while the duration did not show a significant association with results. Forty-nine (39.8%) out of 123 pieces of evidence was rated as moderate quality, and there was no high-quality evidence. Additionally, only 38.2% of the effect sizes of the evidence met the minimally important clinical difference threshold. Clinicians can use the evidence to provide personalized nutrition consultations to patients according to their baseline characteristics. However, the results should be carefully explained and applied because of the sensitivity and low quality.

1. Introduction

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has been a major issue for all people and healthcare professionals worldwide, leading to a large proportion of health expenditure. It was estimated that 10.5% of people aged 20-75 suffered from diabetes mellitus globally, within which over 90% were T2DM, with total health spending of 966 billion US dollars [1]. Since T2DM has proven to be preventable and controllable [2], the remission of a prediabetic state (PreD), or impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), was also concerned and included in the comprehensive prevention of T2DM incidence. Dietitians and clinicians have explored diets for the remission of T2DM since the pre-insulin era [3], and nowadays, medical nutrition therapy is a universal, highly cost-effective treatment for T2DM patients with a strong evidence basis, recommended by multiple guidelines [4-6].

Eating patterns play the leading role in the entire medical nutrition therapy. Various patterns of different components and food groups have been investigated and applied to the treatment of T2DM/PreD patients, from the very high-fat diet by John Rollo in the 18th century [7] to the pattern recommended by American Diabetes Association (ADA) in 2003 [8]. From an evidence-based perspective, hundreds of random controlled trials (RCT), cohorts, and related systematic reviews have been carried out to quantify the efficacy of popular and widely-used eating patterns, e.g., caloric restriction (CR), low-glycemic-index diets (LGID), low-carbohydrate diets (LCD), and Mediterranean diets (Med) [9-14].

However, a common and prominent aspect of all evidence is that a variance of the effectiveness of eating patterns exists in improving different indicators such as blood glucose, weight, and cardiovascular risk factors. For example, Diabetes Canada 2018 guidelines [5] summarized the properties of a series of dietary interventions, pointing out the difference between diets. Consequently, diabetes guidelines strongly recommend a personalized medical nutrition therapy process under the supervision of registered dietitians and multidisciplinary professionals [4-6]. Despite the recommendation, it remains a question of how to choose and apply appropriate dietary patterns for professionals, due to the lack of evidence that directly compares the relative efficacy of different interventions. Whether a specific diet is proper for an individual with specific laboratory profiles and situations and whether it is best-matched remains unclear enough, though high-quality evidence of the effectiveness of particular patterns having been drawn.

It is not cost-effective to carry out multi-arm trials directly comparing several diets. Thus, it is crucial to conduct a network meta-analysis to synthesize evidence. Previous network meta-analyses [15, 16] have assessed a number of patterns, but the authors only included a limited number of studies and outcomes. Furthermore, short-term trials were not considered to be included in the analyses, but a short-term effect may be more common for some patterns [17]. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the relative efficacy of different eating patterns on glycemic control, anthropometrics and serum lipid profiles in the management of patients with T2DM or PreD, and conclude evidence to promote clinical decision-making.

2. Methods

2.1. Study Design

This systematic review was an arm-based Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 6.2 [18]. We reported the results according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses Incorporating Network Meta-analysis (PRISMA-NMA) guideline [19]. An a priori protocol was prepared and registered in PROSPERO (registration number CRD42021278268).

2.2. Eligibility Criteria

We selected peer-reviewed articles and thesis according to the population (P), interventions (I), comparisons (C), outcomes (O), and study design (S). A detailed description of the interventions is in Appendix A.

Inclusion criteria were: (1) P: Adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus or prediabetes; (2) I: The study should contain at least one arm of the interventions as follows: caloric restriction (CR), high-fiber diet (fiber), Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH), high-protein diet (HPD), high-fat diet (HFD), low-carbohydrate diet (LCD), low-glycemic-index diet (LGID), Mediterranean diet (Med), Nordic diet (ND), Paleolithic diet (Paleo), Portfolio diet (PfD), and vegetarian/vegan/plant-based diet (VD); (3) C: The study should contain the control arm as follows, or contain two or more intervention arms: standard diabetes diet, e.g. ADA 2003 diet [8]; ad libitum; general nutrition counselling; or placebo (no intervention); (4) O: the study should reported at least one outcome as follows, where fasting plasma glucose (FPG) was the primary outcome of this meta-analysis: glycemic control, including FPG, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting insulin (FIns) and insulin resistance (IR); anthropometrics, including weight, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), and body fat rate (BFR), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP); serum lipid profiles, including triacylglycerol (TG), total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL); renal function, including serum creatinine, serum urea, serum uric acid and (estimated) glomerular filtration rate; other dichotomous outcomes, including attrition rate, remission of T2DM, incidence of hypoglycemia, incidence of drug or insulin discontinuation, incidence of T2DM from PreD; (5) S: randomized controlled trials (RCT); (6) Language: English or Chinese.

If the studies met one of the criteria below, they were excluded: (1) I: any prescribed between-group difference on exercise, antihyperglycemic medications, insulin injection, or other co-interventions; added a single supplement, or single specified food which did not provide macronutrients; or use meal replacement to provide an appreciable percentage of energy intake; or total energy intake (TEI) < 800 kcal/d (3.3 MJ/d); or the adjustment of intervention during the trial; (2) Duration: less than four weeks or one month for parallel RCTs or any phase of crossover RCTs; or intermittent intervention; (3) S: single-arm or self-controlled trials; (4) Data availability: trials not completed, or without data analysis and published reports; or articles with inappropriate or insufficient data.

2.3. Search Strategy

We conducted searches of electronic databases and trial registers: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL and Open Dissertation, ProQuest, Scopus, Global Index Medicus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Clinicaltrials.gov, SinoMed, WanFang Med, and CNKI. All publications from the inception to 13 October 2021 were initially retrieved. An updated search was conducted on March 17, 2022 using Scopus and Google Scholar after completing major data extraction works to identify the latest relevant articles. A “participants AND intervention AND design NOT exclusion” strategy was applied, using MeSH terms and free entry terms. Full search strategy can be found in File S1.

2.4. Data Selection and Extraction

All references identified from the search were imported into EndNote 20 (Clarivate, PA, USA) to move duplicates automatically and manually. After automatic exclusion using terms “Systematic Review; Meta-analysis; Cohort; Protocol; rats; gestation; pregnan*; child; adolescent; Roux-en-Y; Bariatric Surgery; mechanism; intermittent” and relevant Chinese terms, reviewers (B.-T.Z., H.-Q.P., and F.-D.L.) assessed the eligibility of publications and trials in the order of title, abstract and full text. All references were decided by at least two reviewers, and arisen discrepancies were discussed and decided by the three authors together.

We used MySQL 8.0 (Oracle Corporation, TX, USA) to perform data extraction and manage data. Basic information, study designs, arms, participant characteristics, nutrition intake, and outcome measurements at different timepoints were extracted (File S2). Two authors (B.-T.Z. and Z.-Y.Y.) independently extracted and checked the data.

R 4.1.3 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) and Microsoft Excel 2019 (Microsoft Corporation, WA, USA) were used for data conversion and imputation. For continuous outcomes, we calculated the change from baseline and its standard deviation (SD) based on the baseline and the last measurement time point of each arm according to Cochrane Handbook, if not reported by the article. Correlation coefficients for changes from baseline and for crossover RCTs were estimated using reported SDs from included studies (File S3). Median and interquartile range was converted into mean and standard deviation using methods from Luo et al. [20] and Wan et al. [21] after testing for the skewness using methods from Shi et al. [22]. WebPlot Digitizer 4.5 [23] was applied for extracting data from figures. Ultimately, R package “mice” [24] (predictive mean matching or random forest method) was used for the imputation of missing values of covariates for meta-regression.

2.5. Risk of Bias Assessment

A revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials – Risk of Bias 2 [25] and Risk of Bias 2 for crossover trials [26] were employed to assess the risk of bias (RoB) of parallel and crossover RCTs, respectively. Two reviewers (B.-T.Z. and H.-Q.P.) assessed the RoBs independently, with all arisen divergences discussed and reached consensuses.

2.6. Data Synthesis

Our study synthesized evidence through an arm-based Bayesian network meta-analysis in a random effect model. We use R package “gemtc” 1.0-1 for meta-analysis, inconsistency test, heterogeneity test, meta-regression, and sensitivity analysis [27, 28]. Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling was performed using JAGS 4.3.0 via R package “rjags” 4.12 [29, 30]. Comparison-adjusted funnel plots, Egger’s test, and Begg’s test were performed to detect publication bias under a frequentist framework and random effect model using the R package “netmeta” 2.1-0 and “metafor” 3.4-0 [31, 32].

Continuous outcomes were presented as mean difference (MD) or difference in percentage change from baseline (Percentage MD, PMD, only for fasting insulin and insulin resistance) and 95% credible intervals (95% CrI), while relative risk (RR) and 95% CrI were for dichotomous variables.

2.7. Quality of the Evidence and Drawing Conclusions

We rated the quality of evidence of comparisons of experimental diets and control diets based on the GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis [33] and the GRADE handbook [34]. Conclusions were drawn according to the partially contextualized framework for network meta-analysis by the GRADE working group [35], where minimal clinically important differences (MCID) and thresholds for moderate and large beneficial/harm effects were identified based on previous studies [14, 36-38].

3. Results

We identified 9358 publications and registrations from the initial search, and 176 from the updated search. After removing 4466 duplicates, 4164 were excluded through title screening, 600 excluded through abstract screening, and 199 excluded through full-text screening. Manual search and search of reference lists obtained 11 articles, where six were included. As a result, 111 publications [39-149] were included, among which 107 independent studies were identified (Figure 1). All excluded items through full-text screening and their reason for exclusion were listed in File S4.

Figure 1.
Figure 1.

PRISMA flowchart of data selection. CENTRAL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; NCT, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Among our prescribed outcomes, data of FPG, HbA1c, FIns, IR, weight, BMI, WC, SBP, DBP, TG, TC, HDL, LDL, and attrition rate were sufficient to form networks and perform a meta-analysis. However, other outcomes were not analyzed due to insufficient data.

3.1. Study characteristics

The 107 included studies contained 8909 participants for data analysis (full-dataset, completer, or intention-to-treat analysis) and 8583 completers. A total of ten experimental diets and 223 arms was reported. The studies reported efficacy of CR, DASH, fiber, HFD, HPD, LCD, LGID, Med, Paleo, and VD, but ND and PfD were not included.

Characteristics of the studies are displayed in Table 1. Studies were from 26 countries, where 31.8% were from China, 15.0% from the USA, 9.3% from Australia, and 4.7% from Canada. We included 16 crossover RCTs and 91 parallel RCTs. Among them, seven were multi-arm, and six were multicenter. Four studies reported their outcomes in two or more publications. Only five studies focused on PreD population; considering that there was not significant difference among the PreD RCTs and the T2DM RCTs, we did not distinguish them in the meta-analysis. Fundings and conflicts of interest of the studies are listed in File S5.

View this table:
Table 1.

Characteristics of included studies.

3.2 Risk of Bias Assessment

The overall risk of bias of eligible studies was acceptable, but trials of some patterns (i.e., fiber and DASH) had a relatively high risk of bias (Table 1). 15.9% of studies were at high risk of bias, while 12.1% were at low risk and the left were of some concerns (Figure 2). Notably, the risk of bias of crossover RCTs was significantly higher than parallel ones (Mann-Whitney U = 978.00, P0.05/2 = 0.006), mainly due to the period and carryover effects. Detailed risk of bias ratings of each domain is displayed in File S6.

Figure 2.
Figure 2.

Risk of bias of included studies. a The “period and carryover effects” domain was only for crossover RCTs (n = 16), and other domains were for all included studies (n = 107).

3.3. Main Outcomes

The number of nodes and comparisons varied among outcomes (Figure 3 and File S7). File S8 presented all league tables and cumulative ranking curves; File S9 showed forest plots with heterogeneity and inconsistency tests of all outcomes.

Figure 3.
Figure 3.

Efficacy of different eating patterns on glycemic control, anthropometrics, serum lipid profiles, and comparative attrition rate. I, intervention arm; C, control arm; No., Number of direct comparisons; Incons., P value of inconsistency test (node-splitting method); MD, mean difference; PMD, difference in percentage change from baseline; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; FIns, fasting insulin; IR, insulin resistance; BMI, body mass index; WC, waist circumference; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; TG, triacylglycerol; TC, total cholesterol; LDL, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Thick dashed referred to the null value, and thin dashed referred to the MCID threshold. Unless otherwise specified using “vs”, the effect sizes were experimental patterns vs control. I2 values were for network heterogeneity, including both direct and indirect comparisons.

3.3.1 Glycemic Control

For glycemic control, high-fiber diet (fiber) was ranked as the best pattern for reducing FPG (MD -1.3 mmol/L, 95% CrI -2.3 to -0.22, SUCRA 82.7%), followed by LGID (-0.94 mmol/L, -1.2 to -0.65, SUCRA 74.6%) and LCD (-0.82 mmol/L, -1.1 to -0.51, SUCRA 65.1%) (Figure 3A). DASH (-1.2%, -2.2 to -0.23, SUCRA 90.5%), LGID (-0.71%, -0.93 to -0.49, SUCRA 76.2%), and high-fiber diets (-0.74%, -1.5 to 0.035, SUCRA 71.2%) had the highest probability of improving HbA1c compared with control groups, but high-fiber diets did not show statistical significance (Figure 3B). The effects on reducing FPG and HbA1c were comparable.

FIns and IR were presented as PMD due to the various units reported by studies and the nature of arm-based network meta-analysis that standardized mean difference was not applicable. Effects on improving insulin-related conditions were not stable and significant due to the limited sample size. High-fiber diets achieved a mean of 21% reduction of FIns (95% CrI 5.2% to 46%) with a probability of 79.4% to be the best pattern, followed by LGID (-14%, -27% to -0.98%, SUCRA 68.3%) (Figure 3C). IR was reported as homeostatic model assessment (HOMA)1-IR and HOMA2-IR from included studies, among which HPD showed the best beneficial effects on improving IR (-22%, -37% to -7.0%, SUCRA 86.3%) (Figure 3D).

3.3.2. Anthropometrics

CR was still one of the most effective diet patterns for weight loss (-4.1 kg, -6.1 to -2.0, SUCRA 86.8%) and WC (-4.5 cm, - 7.4 to -1.8, SUCRA 82.2%), and LCD was ranked as the second (-3.0 kg, -4.3 to -1.8, SUCRA 74.3%) for weight loss and the best (-1.2 kg/m2, -1.7 to -0.74, SUCRA 81.6%) for BMI reduction (Figure 3E-G). As for blood pressure, DASH was found to be the best pattern for lowering SBP (-7.6 mmHg, -15 to -0.29, SUCRA 87.9%) and the second for DBP (-3.7 mmHg, -10 to 2.8, SUCRA 73.7%), while HPD was the most effective for DBP (-3.0 mmHg, -5.9 to -0.068, SUCRA 74.6%) with slight advantage than DASH (Figure 3I-J).

3.3.3. Lipid Profiles

Figure 3K-N illustrated different interventions’ effects on lipid profiles comparing with control groups. LGID showed the most remarkable efficacy for lowering TC (-0.46 mmol/L, -0.62 to -0.30, SUCRA 87.5%) and LDL (-0.35 mmol/L, -0.47 to -0.24, SUCRA 86.6%), but were not of beneficial effects on HDL. Paleo was ranked as the best pattern for improving TG (-0.50 mmol/L, -1.1 to 0.13, SUCRA 83.4%), though the outcome was not statistically significant. LCD led to an average increase of 0.12 mmol/L (95% CrI 0.073 to 0.17, SUCRA 84.0%) for HDL compared to control, thus being the best intervention with a small effect size.

3.3.4. Attrition

Since a considerable number of studies did not report flowcharts of randomization, allocation and follow-up, we only included trials that reported a loss in at least one arm into synthesis. An attrition rate was calculated as: the attrition number divided by the product of participant number when allocation and the duration of intervention (in weeks). The meta-analysis denoted that there was no significant difference among all patterns (Figure 3H; File S8), which implied that participants’ tolerance for each diet might be similar.

3.4. Heterogeneity and Inconsistency Test

Generally, the included dietary patterns were of moderate to high heterogeneity (Figure 3, File S9, and File S10), making the results less confident. LCD vs. control, CR vs. control, LGID vs. control, LCD vs. CR, and LGID vs. LCD were of very high heterogeneity in either direct or network comparison, while Med vs. control and HPD vs. control were with moderate heterogeneity mainly in lipid profiles. Significant inconsistency was observed in LCD vs. CR comparison in FPG, and CR-LCD-control loop of weight and LDL using node-splitting methods. The evidence of CR, LCD and LGID showed severe incoherence and inconsistency and should be interpreted prudently.

3.5. Meta-regression

A random effect meta-regression model with one covariate and exchangeable coefficients was fitted for all included continuous outcomes. All coefficients and adjusted means were presented and summarized in File S11. Universally, the meta-regression denoted that the mean weight, BMI, and macronutrient intake significantly modified the efficacy of interventions of most outcomes. On the contrary, coefficients of the duration of intervention, study design, medication or insulin treatment, duration of disease, and sex ratio were not significant, implying that these factors may not contribute to the effectiveness. Another notable finding that coefficients of sample size and origin (from China or not) showed significance in FPG, weight, and lipid profiles indicated potential publication or selection biases.

3.6. Sensitivity Analysis

Weight, BMI, and TC performed well and showed robustness in the sensitivity analysis using the exclusion of each single study strategy. However, all other outcomes were not robust enough (File S12). The exclusion of Fang 2019 [68], Liu 2020 [98], Lousley 1984 [99], Tang 2021 [127], Wang 2009b [136], Wang 2015 [135], Chandalia 2000 [52], Durrer 2021 [62], Marco-Benedí 2020 [102], Wu 2020 [141] and Zahedi 2021 [146] significantly changed the SUCRA and the 95% CrI of effect size, mainly in comparisons of CR, LCD, and Med vs control, contributing to the severe heterogeneity. When testing for different models, i.e., fixed effect models or unrelated study effect models, Med, HPD, and VD showed narrower 95% CrIs and became statistically significant for more outcome variables (see File S12 for detailed information). The number of included studies for these patterns was small, resulting in a lower weight using a random effect model. The analysis did not observe sensitivity of relative effect priors, between-study heterogeneity priors, and correlation coefficients.

3.7. Publication Bias

Potential publication bias of HbA1c, weight and BMI existed (Egger’s test P = 0.002; < 0.001; and < 0.001, respectively). P values for all outcomes and comparison-adjusted funnel plots were listed in File S13.

3.8. Quality of Evidence and Drawing Conclusions

We identified the minimal clinically important differences (MCID) for each outcome according to the MCIDs reported by previous articles [14, 36-38] (see File S14, Figure 3, and Table 2). Subsequently, the authors reached a consensus on the thresholds of moderate and large beneficial/harmful effects to draw conclusions of evidence under a partially contextualized framework provided by the GRADE workgroup (Table 2). Of all 123 pieces of evidence that compared intervention and control groups, only 49 were rated as moderate quality, and there was no evidence of high quality. At the clinical level, all of the patterns were at least not significantly worse than control diets for each outcome, but most did not show moderate to large beneficial effects. Additionally, more trivial effects were for anthropometrics, while FIns, IR, TG, and LDL were with larger beneficial effects. Because we only included five PreD-related RCTs, all the quality of evidence should be downgraded one level when applying to PreD due to the indirectness.

View this table:
Table 2.

Summary of findings

4. Discussion

In this study, we evaluated the comparative efficacy of eleven eating patterns (ten experimental and one control). We identified the rankings of each pattern for glycemic control, anthropometrics, and lipid profiles. The restriction of energy intake, carbohydrates, and glycemic index (GI), as well as the intake of dietary fiber, were the most effective approaches to improve glycemic control, weight and lipid profiles of patients with T2DM/PreD, with solid and abundant evidence bases. However, the heterogeneity and the sensitivity implied the need of further studies. On the other hand, DASH, Paleolithic diets, and HPD were of satisfactory efficacy in limited outcomes and worth investigation. The meta-analysis also denoted that Mediterranean diets and VD did not act well in nearly all outcomes, mainly due to the imprecision. High-fat diets without carbohydrate restriction did not show any beneficial effects compared to control diets. Severe heterogeneity and sensitivity should be concerned when interpreting the results.

4.1. Energy and Macronutrients

A previous evidence basis has corroborated the efficacy of CR in weight loss, BMI and WC in patients with obesity, metabolic diseases or in healthy individuals [150, 151]. Minor beneficial effects on weight loss and reducing BMI with low and moderate quality of evidence were observed. Meanwhile, CR did not lead to greater improvement of glycemic control, blood pressure, TG, and TC compared to standard diets. Trivial effects on glycemic and lipid outcomes may result from weight loss but not the caloric restriction, since several studies have suggested that a weight loss be of tight relevance to them [152, 153]. The median TEI of the included CR arms was 1594 kcal/d (interquartile range, IQR 1572 to 1609), with a 150-to-400-kcal negative difference compared to standard diets, which was significantly lower than the prescribed (-500 kcal/d). However, the deviance did not lead to the failure of the intervention. A probable explanation was that participants might focus more on their dietary intake and weight loss to improve their diets once the intention and the belief to improve was built via consultation or menus: not only in energy intake but also in other aspects like food groups, dietary fiber, etc. The phenomena were also observed in LCD and LGID.

Carbohydrate restriction acted well in weight, HbA1c, TG, and HDL, where improving HDL was the unique advantage of LCD. Nevertheless, other types of serum lipids, i.e., TC and LDL were not improved, though the meta-regression suggested that carbohydrate intake be negatively correlated to the effectiveness of LGID and CR in modulating lipids. Similar to the CR arms, the median carbohydrate intake of the included LCD arms was 30.5% (IQR 20% to 40%), which indicated that nearly a quarter of included trials did not meet the low-carbohydrate criteria as prescribed. Nevertheless, the effect size was similar to previous systematic reviews [14], and the strict following of the instruction as well as a more intensive intervention did not enhance the effects but may even lead to a decrease, denoted by the meta-regression (File S11). Participants’ motivation and intention may be an explanation: prepackaged or prepared frozen food may not be of participants’ favors, so they would not adhere perfectly to the intervention, and added food to their diets.

Participants usually decreased their food intake in LCD intervention because of the increased satiety, which led to a spontaneous caloric restriction [154, 155]. Therefore, how to distinguish the effects of carbohydrate and caloric restriction in an LCD trial was always the focus, usually by introducing isocaloric arms. However, we did not find a significant between-group difference of actual energy intake in the included LCD trials, despite the limited number of trials that reported actual intake. The meta-regression also suggested that additional caloric restriction or the TEI did not significantly modify the effects of LCD in lipids, implying that carbohydrates acted as a different role in the treatment. Lastly, the combination of carbohydrate and caloric restriction may have more beneficial effects though it brought more compliance problems: in the trial Durrer 2021 [62], severe restrictions (984 kcal/d and 27%TEI carbohydrate) made all of the outcomes improve substantially.

The increased intake of protein without carbohydrate restriction (HPD) effectively improved IR, blood pressure and TG. Furthermore, protein intake was positively correlated to FPG, HbA1c, weight, and BMI improvement in meta-regression. Compared to the previous review [156], the effectiveness of HPD on FPG, HbA1c and other lipids was not observed, mainly due to the different inclusion criteria: only HPD with protein intake of more than 30% TEI and without carbohydrate restriction was included. This implied the different efficacy of protein and carbohydrate. As for HFD, no beneficial effect was detected, and fat intake negatively modified the lipid improvement. Of all five included HFD trials, three [45, 49, 122] emphasized a high-monounsaturated-fat diet, while the other two did not specify the type of fat. Despite the numerical impact of specific lipids, it remained to be evaluated whether the increased intake of monounsaturated fat or other types of fat improved or negatively affected the overall lipoprotein profile [157]. Unfortunately, the included trials were of limited sample size and did not provide sufficient data to draw a thorough interpretation.

4.2. Glycemic Index and Dietary Fiber

LGID and high-fiber diets emphasized more on the quality rather than the quantity of carbohydrates, compared to LCD. Effects of LGID and high-fiber diets were similar: both showed more excellent effects on FPG, HbA1c, FIns, TC, and LDL than most other patterns, but did not significantly improve weight-related outcomes, consistent with other studies [158, 159]. Dietary GI and fiber of specific single food were not well associated [160]. However, the emphasis on lowering GI may encourage participants to increase fiber intake, because the usually recommended natural food groups in nutrition consultations can be both low in GI and high in fiber, e.g., whole grains and nuts.

A recent meta-analysis published in the Lancet has also denoted that dietary fiber and low-GI food were associated with a lower risk of T2DM incidence, where fiber may be a stronger protector [161]. Dietary fiber also had other benefits, e.g., lower all-cause mortality and coronary heart disease incidence [161]. Rather than a severe long-term restriction of the quantity of carbohydrates which leads to higher all-cause mortality [162], LGID and increased fiber intake can be better and sustainable approaches for the management of T2DM patients without obesity/overweight, especially with the circumstance that most people lacked fiber intake [163].

4.3. Mediterranean Diets

Even if previous cohort studies and RCTs have demonstrated the efficacy of Med in T2DM management [164], our study failed to detect a significant improvement driven by Med. Except for HbA1c, IR and TG, all other outcomes were of great imprecision and trivial effects. The effect size was also more trivial than other meta-analyses [15, 165]. Nevertheless, sensitivity analysis using fixed effects models and unrelated study effects models suggested that Med significantly improved FIns, weight, BMI, blood pressure, and TC. Small sample size compared to other interventions could be the reason when using random effects models; different calculation of effect size, i.e., MD of change from baseline or of endpoint may explain the numerical differences.

Moreover, heterogeneity was detected for almost all outcomes of Med vs control comparisons. Researchers have pointed out the variance and bias of the definition of Med in different trials [166], which can cause great between-study heterogeneity and led to the low quality of evidence. Though several scales have been developed to measure the adherence to Med (e.g., MedDiet Score) [167], few trials employed it, thus not able to assess the impact of adherence to the effects of Med.

4.4. DASH and Paleolithic Diets

Evidence of the efficacy of DASH and Paleo was limited and of low quality due to the sample size. As one of the recommended healthy patterns for the general population by Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA 2020-2025) [168], many studies have addressed its benefit in blood pressure and glycemic control [169, 170]. However, RCTs focusing on the effects of DASH in T2DM/PreD patients were rare. Only two RCTs on DASH were included, where one [40] was of high risk of bias; one trial for Paleo was eligible. This study also outlined the beneficial effects of DASH on blood pressure, TC, LDL, and HbA1c, where DASH was ranked as the most effective intervention for HbA1c with a high probability (90.5%), suggesting the potential advantage for T2DM remission. For Paleo, Jönsson T (the author of the included trial [88]) and his colleagues also quantified the improvement of leptin and introduced a scale (Paleolithic Diet Fraction) to measure the compliance, based on their trial [88, 171], which provided a basis for further studying.

Considering the lack of RCTs, a systematic review containing all eligible controlled trials or other observational studies may be better to address the efficacy of DASH and Paleo, and the effects of these patterns in the management of T2DM/PreD still need more demonstration of high quality.

4.5. Vegan, Vegetarian, or Plant-based Diets

VD did not show any significant beneficial effects in the meta-analysis. Nevertheless, the mean differences of VD were similar to the previous studies [37], thus did not affect the conclusion of evidence but lowered the ratings of quality of evidence. While using fixed effects models, the effectiveness of VD on BMI, WC, and HbA1c was detected. However, moderate heterogeneity made it unreasonable to employ fixed effects models, though the small number of participants led to wider 95% CrIs when using random effect models.

Notably, the carbohydrate intake in included VD trials was relatively high (mean 65.8%TEI). The sensitivity analysis also showed a slight improvement of SUCRA in TG after excluding Lee 2016 [92], which contained about 72%TEI of carbohydrate in the intervention arm. Therefore, researchers should consider a lower carbohydrate intake when conducting VD, and the effects would promise to be more significant.

4.7. Strengths and Limitations

We included more than 8000 participants and the most frequently used outcomes in the meta-analysis. Meanwhile, the summary of findings was clearly drawn following the partially contextualized framework. These could be advantages of our study. However, this study had several limitations. First, the severe heterogeneity and sensitivity lowered the quality of evidence. Second, the sample size of VD, DASH, and Paleo was limited, leading to the imprecision. Third, only five PreD trials were included, raising the indirectness when applying the evidence to the PreD population. Moreover, there was not an adequate method to compare the longitudinal dataset of different patterns, though the data of different timepoints have been extracted.

5. Conclusions

This systematic review provided an insight into the efficacy of different eating patterns in the management of T2DM and PreD with moderate-to-low quality evidence. Clinicians and dietitians can take the evidence into consideration when providing nutrition consultations and conducting medical nutrition therapy. However, the quality and the sensitivity of the evidence can be a barrier to clinical practice. More powerful and well-designed RCTs, as well as real-world evidence studies, are needed to draw more precise conclusions, especially for DASH and Paleolithic diets.

Data Availability

All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript and the supplementary materials.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: www.mdpi.com/xxx/s1, File S1: Full search strategy; File S2: Data extraction template; File S3: Correlation coefficients for estimation; File S4: Reason for exclusion; File S5: Fundings and conflicts of interest of included studies; File S6: Risk of bias assessment; File S7: Network plots; File S8: League tables and cumulative ranking curves; File S9: Forest plots; File S10: Heterogeneity and inconsistency test; File S11: Meta-regression; File S12: Sensitivity analysis; File S13: Publication bias; File S14: Minimal clinically important difference and thresholds for effects.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, B.-T.Z. and J.-W.D.; Methodology, B.-T.Z.; Software, B.-T.Z.; Validation, H.-Q.P., F.-D.L. and Z.- Y.Y.; Formal Analysis, B.-T.Z.; Investigation, B.-T.Z. and H.-Q.P.; Resources, Y.L.; Data Curation, B.-T.Z. and Z.-Y.Y.; Writing – Original Draft Preparation, B.-T.Z. and H.-Q.P.; Writing – Review & Editing, Y.L. and F.-D.L.; Visualization, B.-T.Z.; Supervision, J.-W.D. and Y.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available in supplementary materials.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge Professor Lawrence J. Cheskin from George Mason University for his kindly replying our email about the data availability of his registered trial.

Appendix A

The dietary patterns included in this article were defined as:

  1. Caloric restriction (CR): a more than 500-kcal negative energy balance.

  2. DASH: a dietary pattern that emphasizes dietary fiber, protein, fruits rich in potassium/magnesium/calcium, vegetables, beans, legumes, whole grains, and low-fat dairy food; avoids sugar and saturated fat intake [172].

  3. High-fiber diet: a total dietary fiber intake of more than 35 to 40 g/d, or 20 to 25 g/1000 kcal.

  4. High-fat diet (HFD): Fat intake of more than 30% TEI with more than 40% TEI carbohydrate intake.

  5. High-protein diet (HPD): 30% TEI or more protein intake with more than 40% TEI carbohydrate intake.

  6. Low-carbohydrate diet (LCD): less than 40% TEI carbohydrate intake.

  7. Low-glycemic-index diet (LGID): a reduced average glycemic index of all dietary intake, less than 50 to 65.

  8. Mediterranean diet: a dietary pattern rich in olive oil, vegetables, cereals, legumes, nuts, seafood/fish, dairy food, and moderate red wine [166].

  9. Paleolithic diet: a dietary pattern that emphasizes the intake of “lean meat, fish, fruits, root vegetables, eggs and nuts” [173], and avoids processed food.

  10. Vegetarian, vegan or plant-based diet: a series of dietary patterns where most of the macronutrients were from plants and not from meat, with or without eggs, milk or other animal-derived food.

The macronutrients and food group intake can be as prescribed or as actual.

Footnotes

  • zengbentuoxmu{at}outlook.com (B.-T.Z.); yezhenyu1999{at}gmail.com (Z.-Y.Y.)

  • phq19991011{at}126.com

  • 18350278581{at}163.com

References

  1. [1].↵
    International Diabetes Federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas. 10 ed. Brussels: International Diabetes Federation; 2021.
  2. [2].↵
    Gong Q, Zhang P, Wang J, Ma J, An Y, Chen Y, et al. Morbidity and mortality after lifestyle intervention for people with impaired glucose tolerance: 30-year results of the Da Qing Diabetes Prevention Outcome Study. The lancet Diabetes & endocrinology. 2019;7:452–61.
    OpenUrl
  3. [3].↵
    Karamanou M, Protogerou A, Tsoucalas G, Androutsos G, Poulakou-Rebelakou E. Milestones in the history of diabetes mellitus: The main contributors. World J Diabetes. 2016;7:1–7.
    OpenUrl
  4. [4].↵
    American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. 5. Facilitating Behavior Change and Well-being to Improve Health Outcomes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2022. Diabetes Care. 2021;45:S60–S82.
    OpenUrl
  5. [5].↵
    Sievenpiper JL, Chan CB, Dworatzek PD, Freeze C, Williams SL. Nutrition Therapy. Can J Diabetes. 2018;42:S64–S79.
    OpenUrl
  6. [6].↵
    National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Type 2 diabetes in adults: management. 2015.
  7. [7].↵
    White P. Diabetes in Childhood and Adolescence. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger; 1932.
  8. [8].↵
    American Diabetes Association. Standards of Medical Care for Patients With Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes Care. 2003;26:s33–s50.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. [9].↵
    Lean MEJ, Leslie WS, Barnes AC, Brosnahan N, Thom G, McCombie L, et al. Durability of a primary care-led weight-management intervention for remission of type 2 diabetes: 2-year results of the DiRECT open-label, cluster-randomised trial. The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology. 2019;7:344–55.
    OpenUrl
  10. [10].
    Martínez-González MÁ, Corella D, Salas-Salvadó J, Ros E, Covas MI, Fiol M, et al. Cohort Profile: Design and methods of the PREDIMED study. Int J Epidemiol. 2010;41:377–85.
    OpenUrl
  11. [11].
    Mitrou PN, Kipnis V, Thiébaut ACM, Reedy J, Subar AF, Wirfält E, et al. Mediterranean Dietary Pattern and Prediction of All-Cause Mortality in a US Population: Results From the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167:2461–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  12. [12].
    Riboli E, Hunt KJ, Slimani N, Ferrari P, Norat T, Fahey M, et al. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC): study populations and data collection. Public Health Nutr. 2002;5:1113–24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  13. [13].
    Stevens J, Ahn K, Juhaeri, Houston D, Steffan L, Couper D. Dietary Fiber Intake and Glycemic Index and Incidence of Diabetes in African-American and White Adults: The ARIC Study. Diabetes Care. 2002;25:1715–21.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. [14].↵
    Goldenberg JZ, Day A, Brinkworth GD, Sato J, Yamada S, Jonsson T, et al. Efficacy and safety of low and very low carbohydrate diets for type 2 diabetes remission: systematic review and meta-analysis of published and unpublished randomized trial data. BMJ. 2021;372:m4743.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. [15].↵
    Schwingshackl L, Chaimani A, Hoffmann G, Schwedhelm C, Boeing H. A network meta-analysis on the comparative efficacy of different dietary approaches on glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Eur J Epidemiol. 2018;33:157–70.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. [16].↵
    Pan B, Wu Y, Yang Q, Ge L, Gao C, Xun Y, et al. The impact of major dietary patterns on glycemic control, cardiovascular risk factors, and weight loss in patients with type 2 diabetes: A network meta-analysis. J Evid Based Med. 2019;12:29–39.
    OpenUrl
  17. [17].↵
    McArdle PD, Greenfield SM, Rilstone SK, Narendran P, Haque MS, Gill PS. Carbohydrate restriction for glycaemic control in Type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabet Med. 2019;36:335–48.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  18. [18].↵
    Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page M, et al. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.2. Cochrane; 2021.
  19. [19].↵
    Hutton B, Salanti G, Caldwell DM, Chaimani A, Schmid CH, Cameron C, et al. The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162:777–84.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. [20].↵
    Luo D, Wan X, Liu J, Tong T. Optimally estimating the sample mean from the sample size, median, mid-range, and/or mid-quartile range. Stat Methods Med Res. 2018;27:1785–805.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. [21].↵
    Wan X, Wang W, Liu J, Tong T. Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14:1–13.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. [22].↵
    Shi J, Luo D, Wan X, Liu Y, Liu J, Bian Z, et al. Detecting the skewness of data from the sample size and the five-number summary. arXiv preprint arXiv:201005749. 2020.
  23. [23].↵
    Rohatgi A. WebPlotDigitizer 4.5.
  24. [24].↵
    van Buuren S, Groothuis-Oudshoorn K. mice: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R. Journal of Statistical Software. 2011;45:1–67.
    OpenUrl
  25. [25].↵
    Sterne JA, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019;366.
  26. [26].↵
    Higgins J, Tianjing L, Jonathan S. Revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) Additional considerations for crossover trials. 2021.
  27. [27].↵
    van Valkenhoef G, Dias S, Ades AE, Welton NJ. Automated generation of node-splitting models for assessment of inconsistency in network meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods. 2016;7:80–93.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  28. [28].↵
    van Valkenhoef G, Lu G, de Brock B, Hillege H, Ades A, Welton NJ. Automating network meta-analysis. Research synthesis methods. 2012;3:285–99.
    OpenUrl
  29. [29].↵
    Lunn D, Spiegelhalter D, Thomas A, Best N. The BUGS project: Evolution, critique and future directions. Stat Med. 2009;28:3049–67.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  30. [30].↵
    Plummer M, Best N, Cowles K, Vines K. CODA: convergence diagnosis and output analysis for MCMC. R News. 2006;6:7–11.
    OpenUrl
  31. [31].↵
    Chaimani A, Salanti G. Using network meta-analysis to evaluate the existence of small-study effects in a network of interventions. Res Synth Methods. 2012;3:161–76.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  32. [32].↵
    Viechtbauer W. Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package. Journal of Statistical Software. 2010;36:1–48.
    OpenUrl
  33. [33].↵
    Puhan MA, Schünemann HJ, Murad MH, Li T, Brignardello-Petersen R, Singh JA, et al. A GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis. BMJ : British Medical Journal. 2014;349:g5630.
    OpenUrl
  34. [34].↵
    GRADE Working Group. GRADE Handbook. 2013.
  35. [35].↵
    Brignardello-Petersen R, Izcovich A, Rochwerg B, Florez ID, Hazlewood G, Alhazanni W, et al. GRADE approach to drawing conclusions from a network meta-analysis using a partially contextualised framework. BMJ. 2020;371:m3907.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  36. [36].↵
    Ramachandran A, Riddle MC, Kabali C, Gerstein HC. Relationship between A1C and fasting plasma glucose in dysglycemia or type 2 diabetes: an analysis of baseline data from the ORIGIN trial. Diabetes Care. 2012;35:749–53.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. [37].↵
    Viguiliouk E, Kendall CWC, Kahleová H, Rahelić D, Salas-Salvadó J, Choo VL, et al. Effect of vegetarian dietary patterns on cardiometabolic risk factors in diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Nutr. 2019;38:1133–45.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  38. [38].↵
    Johnston BC, Kanters S, Bandayrel K, Wu P, Naji F, Siemieniuk RA, et al. Comparison of Weight Loss Among Named Diet Programs in Overweight and Obese Adults: A Meta-analysis. JAMA. 2014;312:923–33.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  39. [39].↵
    Al-Jazzaf B. Dietary approaches for the reduction of cardiovascular disease risk in type 2 diabetes mellitus and obesity [Ph.D.]. Ann Arbor: University of Surrey (United Kingdom); 2007.
  40. [40].↵
    Azadbakht L, Fard NR, Karimi M, Baghaei MH, Surkan PJ, Rahimi M, et al. Effects of the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) eating plan on cardiovascular risks among type 2 diabetic patients: a randomized crossover clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2011;34:55–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  41. [41].
    Bahado-Singh PS, Riley CK, Wheatley AO, Boyne MS, Morrison EY, Asemota HN. High fiber Caribbean diets with low-intermediate GI improve glycemic control, cardiovascular and inflammatory indicators in overweight persons with type 2 diabetes: A randomized control study. Current Research in Nutrition and Food Science. 2015;3:36–45.
    OpenUrl
  42. [42].
    Barnard ND, Cohen J, Jenkins DJ, Turner-McGrievy G, Gloede L, Green A, et al. A low-fat vegan diet and a conventional diabetes diet in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a randomized, controlled, 74-wk clinical trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009;89:1588s–96s.
    OpenUrl
  43. [43].
    Barnard ND, Cohen J, Jenkins DJA, Turner-McGrievy G, Gloede L, Jaster B, et al. A low-fat vegan diet improves glycemic control and cardiovascular risk factors in a randomized clinical trial in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:1777–83.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. [44].
    Brand JC, Colagiuri S, Crossman S, Allen A, Roberts DC, Truswell AS. Low-Glycemic Index Foods Improve Long-Term Glycemic Control in NIDDM. Diabetes Care. 1991;14:95–101.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  45. [45].↵
    Brehm BJ, Lattin BL, Summer SS, Boback JA, Gilchrist GM, Jandacek RJ, et al. One-year comparison of a high-monounsaturated fat diet with a high-carbohydrate diet in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2009;32:215–20.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  46. [46].
    Breukelman GJ, Basson AK, Djarova TG, Du Preez CJ, Shaw I, Malan H, et al. Concurrent low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet with/without physical activity does not improve glycaemic control in type 2 diabetics. South Afr J Clin Nutr. 2021;34:18–21.
    OpenUrl
  47. [47].
    Breukelman GJ, Basson AK, Djarova TG, Du Preez CJ, Shaw I, Shaw BS. Combination Low Carbohydrate, High Fat Diet and Physical Activity Intervention on Lipoprotein-Lipids in Type 2 Diabetics. Asian J Sports Med. 2019;10:1–7.
    OpenUrl
  48. [48].
    Brinkworth GD, Noakes M, Parker B, Foster P, Clifton PM. Long-term effects of advice to consume a high-protein, low-fat diet, rather than a conventional weight-loss diet, in obese adults with type 2 diabetes: one-year follow-up of a randomised trial. Diabetologia. 2004;47:1677–86.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  49. [49].↵
    Brunerova L, Smejkalova V, Potockova J, Andel M. A comparison of the influence of a high-fat diet enriched in monounsaturated fatty acids and conventional diet on weight loss and metabolic parameters in obese non-diabetic and Type 2 diabetic patients. Diabet Med. 2007;24:533–40.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  50. [50].
    Cao A-H, Sun L-Z, Cui J-W, Zhang X-J. [Effects of a low-carbohydrate diet and a low-fat diet on weight and glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus]. Zhongguo Quanke Yixue [Chinese General Practice]. 2011;14:52-3; 6.
    OpenUrl
  51. [51].
    Ceriello A, Esposito K, Sala LL, Pujadas G, Nigris VD, Testa R, et al. The protective effect of the Mediterranean diet on endothelial resistance to GLP-1 in type 2 diabetes: A preliminary report. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2014;13.
  52. [52].↵
    Chandalia M, Garg A, Lutjohann D, von Bergmann K, Grundy SM, Brinkley LJ. Beneficial effects of high dietary fiber intake in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1392–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  53. [53].
    Chen CY, Huang WS, Chen HC, Chang CH, Lee LT, Chen HS, et al. Effect of a 90 g/day low-carbohydrate diet on glycaemic control, small, dense low-density lipoprotein and carotid intima-media thickness in type 2 diabetic patients: An 18-month randomised controlled trial. PLoS One. 2020;15:e0240158.
    OpenUrl
  54. [54].
    Chen X, Su H, Kunii D, Kudou K, Zhang Y, Zhao Y, et al. The Effects of Mobile-App-Based Low-Carbohydrate Dietary Guidance on Postprandial Hyperglycemia in Adults with Prediabetes. Diabetes Ther. 2020;11:2341–55.
    OpenUrl
  55. [55].
    Choi KM, Han KA, Ahn HJ, Lee SY, Hwang SY, Kim BH, et al. The effects of caloric restriction on fetuin-A and cardiovascular risk factors in rats and humans: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2013;79:356–63.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  56. [56].
    Coppell KJ, Kataoka M, Williams SM, Chisholm AW, Vorgers SM, Mann JI. Nutritional intervention in patients with type 2 diabetes who are hyperglycaemic despite optimised drug treatment - Lifestyle over and above drugs in diabetes (LOADD) study: Randomised controlled trial. BMJ (Online). 2010;341:237.
    OpenUrl
  57. [57].
    Coulston AM, Hollenbeck CB, Swislocki ALM, Reaven GM. Persistence of hypertriglyceridemic effect of low-fat high-carbohydrate diets in NIDDM patients. Diabetes Care. 1989;12:94–101.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  58. [58].
    Daly ME, Paisey R, Paisey R, Millward BA, Eccles C, Williams K, et al. Short-term effects of severe dietary carbohydrate-restriction advice in Type 2 diabetes--a randomized controlled trial. Diabet Med. 2006;23:15–20.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  59. [59].
    Davis NJ, Tomuta N, Schechter C, Isasi CR, Segal-Isaacson CJ, Stein D, et al. Comparative study of the effects of a 1-year dietary intervention of a low-carbohydrate diet versus a low-fat diet on weight and glycemic control in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2009;32:1147–52.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  60. [60].
    Ding H, Shao J, Zhe W, Zhang Y. [The Application of Low Glycemic Index Diet in Nutrition Intervention to Uygur Patients with Diabetes]. Zhongguo Manxingbing Yufang Yu Kongzhi [Chinese Journal of Prevention and Control of Chronic Diseases]. 2010;18:123-4;8.
    OpenUrl
  61. [61].
    Ding H, Shao J, Zhe W, Zhang Y. [Application of low glycemic index diet in diabetes of Uygur and its effect on biochemical indicators]. Yingyang Xuebao [Acta Nutrimenta Sinica]. 2010;32:460–2.
    OpenUrl
  62. [62].↵
    Durrer C, McKelvey S, Singer J, Batterham AM, Johnson JD, Gudmundson K, et al. A randomized controlled trial of pharmacist-led therapeutic carbohydrate and energy restriction in type 2 diabetes. Nat Commun. 2021;12:5367.
    OpenUrl
  63. [63].
    Elhayany A, Lustman A, Abel R, Attal-Singer J, Vinker S. A low carbohydrate Mediterranean diet improves cardiovascular risk factors and diabetes control among overweight patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a 1-year prospective randomized intervention study. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2010;12:204–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  64. [64].
    Esposito K, Maiorino MI, Ciotola M, Di Palo C, Scognamiglio P, Gicchino M, et al. Effects of a Mediterranean-style diet on the need for antihyperglycemic drug therapy in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:306–14.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  65. [65].
    Fabricatore AN, Wadden TA, Ebbeling CB, Thomas JG, Stallings VA, Schwartz S, et al. Targeting dietary fat or glycemic load in the treatment of obesity and type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011;92:37–45.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  66. [66].
    Fan C, Chen L, Wang H. [Practice of employing a low glycemic index dietary regimen in dietary guidance for elderly diabetic patient]. Hulixue Zazhi [Journal of Nursing Science]. 2013;28:77–9.
    OpenUrl
  67. [67].
    Fan L, Duan A, Xue Z, Feng Y. [Effect of low glycemic index diet in the clinical treatment of diabetes mellitus]. Quanke Huli [Chinese General Nursing]. 2010;8:1711–2.
    OpenUrl
  68. [68].↵
    Fang F. [Analysis of the Effects of Low-medium Caloric Diet on Overweight or Obese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus]. Tangniaobing Xin Shijie [Diabetes New World]. 2019;22:49–51.
    OpenUrl
  69. [69].
    Fang R. [Effect of low glycemic index diet on glucose and lipid metabolism in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the community]. Zhonghua Baojian Yixue Zazhi [Chinese Journal of Health Care and Medicine]. 2016;18:243–4.
    OpenUrl
  70. [70].
    Gannon MC, Nuttall FQ. Effect of a high-protein, low-carbohydrate diet on blood glucose control in people with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes. 2004;53:2375–82.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  71. [71].
    Gannon MC, Nuttall FQ, Saeed A, Jordan K, Hoover H. An increase in dietary protein improves the blood glucose response in persons with type 2 diabetes. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003;78:734–41.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  72. [72].
    Goldstein T, Kark JD, Berry EM, Adler B, Ziv E, Raz I. The effect of a low carbohydrate energy-unrestricted diet on weight loss in obese type 2 diabetes patients - A randomized controlled trial. e-SPEN. 2011;6:e178–e86.
    OpenUrl
  73. [73].
    Gram-Kampmann EM, Hansen CD, Hugger MB, Jensen JM, Brønd JC, Hermann AP, et al. Effects of a six-month low-carbohydrate diet on glycemic control, body composition and cardiovascular risk factors in patients with type 2 diabetes: an open-label RCT. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism.n/a.
  74. [74].
    Guldbrand H, Dizdar B, Bunjaku B, Lindström T, Bachrach-Lindström M, Fredrikson M, et al. In type 2 diabetes, randomisation to advice to follow a low-carbohydrate diet transiently improves glycaemic control compared with advice to follow a low-fat diet producing a similar weight loss. Diabetologia. 2012;55:2118–27.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  75. [75].
    Guo L, Du N, Zhu J, Kan W. [Effect of low glycemic index diet on the metabolism of 243 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus]. Zhongguo Baojian Yingyang [China Health Care & Nutrition]. 2014;7:4260.
    OpenUrl
  76. [76].
    Han Y, Cheng B, Guo Y, Wang Q, Yang N, Lin P. A Low-Carbohydrate Diet Realizes Medication Withdrawal: A Possible Opportunity for Effective Glycemic Control. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2021;12.
  77. [77].
    Hashemi R, Rahimlou M, Baghdadian S, Manafi M. Investigating the effect of DASH diet on blood pressure of patients with type 2 diabetes and prehypertension: Randomized clinical trial. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2019;13:1–4.
    OpenUrl
  78. [78].
    He L, Meng G, Chen W, Jin H, Peng Q. [Effects of hypoglycemia index and hypoglycemia loaded diet on oxidative stress and anthropometric parameters in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus]. Zhongguo Shiyong Huli Zazhi [Chinese Journal of Practical Nursing]. 2017;33:347–51.
    OpenUrl
  79. [79].
    Heilbronn LK, Noakes M, Clifton PM. The effect of high- and low-glycemic index energy restricted diets on plasma lipid and glucose profiles in type 2 diabetic subjects with varying glycemic control. J Am Coll Nutr. 2002;21:120–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  80. [80].
    Hockaday TDR, Hockaday JM, Mann JI, Turner RC. Prospective comparison of modified-fat–high-carbohydrate with standard low-carbohydrate dietary advice in the treatment of diabetes: one year follow-up study. Br J Nutr. 1978;39:357–62.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  81. [81].
    Hu X, Gu Q, Lu D, Li B, Jia W, Ge J. [Effect of diets with different carbohydrate contents and exercise on cardiovascular risk factors in people with prediabetes]. Shiyong Linchuang Yixue (Jiangxi) [Practical Clinical Medicine]. 2018;19:1–5.
    OpenUrl
  82. [82].
    Huang J, Shen H, Li M. [Application of low glycemic index dietary regimen in dietary education for elderly type 2 diabetic patients]. Zhongxiyi Jiehe Huli (Zhongyingwen) [Nursing of Integrated Tradition Chinese and Western Medicine]. 2016;2:86–8.
    OpenUrl
  83. [83].
    Ikem RT, Kolawole BA, Ojofeitimi EO, Salawu A, Ajose OA, Abiose S, et al. A controlled comparison of the effect of a high fiber diet on the glycaemic and lipid profile of Nigerian clinic patients with type 2 diabetes. Pakistan journal of nutrition. 2007;6:111–6.
    OpenUrl
  84. [84].
    Iqbal N, Vetter ML, Moore RH, Chittams JL, Dalton-Bakes CV, Dowd M, et al. Effects of a low-intensity intervention that prescribed a low-carbohydrate vs. a low-fat diet in obese, diabetic participants. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2010;18:1733–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  85. [85].
    Itsiopoulos C, Brazionis L, Kaimakamis M, Cameron M, Best JD, O’Dea K, et al. Can the Mediterranean diet lower HbA1c in type 2 diabetes? Results from a randomized cross-over study. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2011;21:740–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  86. [86].
    Jenkins DJA, Kendall CWC, McKeown-Eyssen G, Josse RG, Silverberg J, Booth GL, et al. Effect of a low-glycemic index or a high-cereal fiber diet on type 2 diabetes: A randomized trial. JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association. 2008;300:2742–53.
    OpenUrl
  87. [87].
    Jimenez-Cruz A, Bacardi-Gascon M, Turnbull WH, Rosales-Garay P, Severino-Lugo I. A flexible, low-glycemic index Mexican-style diet in overweight and obese subjects with type 2 diabetes improves metabolic parameters during a 6-week treatment period. Diabetes Care. 2003;26:1967–70.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  88. [88].↵
    Jönsson T, Granfeldt Y, Ahrén B, Branell UC, Pålsson G, Hansson A, et al. Beneficial effects of a Paleolithic diet on cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetes: a randomized cross-over pilot study. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2009;8:35.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  89. [89].
    Kahleova H, Matoulek M, Malinska H, Oliyarnik O, Kazdova L, Neskudla T, et al. Vegetarian diet improves insulin resistance and oxidative stress markers more than conventional diet in subjects with Type 2 diabetes. Diabet Med. 2011;28:549–59.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  90. [90].
    Krebs JD, Elley CR, Parry-Strong A, Lunt H, Drury PL, Bell DA, et al. The Diabetes Excess Weight Loss (DEWL) Trial: a randomised controlled trial of high-protein versus high-carbohydrate diets over 2 years in type 2 diabetes. Diabetologia. 2012;55:905–14.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  91. [91].
    Lasa A, Miranda J, Bulló M, Casas R, Salas-Salvadó J, Larretxi I, et al. Comparative effect of two Mediterranean diets versus a low-fat diet on glycaemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2014;68:767–72.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  92. [92].↵
    Lee YM, Kim SA, Lee IK, Kim JG, Park KG, Jeong JY, et al. Effect of a Brown Rice Based Vegan Diet and Conventional Diabetic Diet on Glycemic Control of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A 12-Week Randomized Clinical Trial. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0155918.
    OpenUrl
  93. [93].
    Li R, Liu F, Cui S. [Effectiveness of 30% low-carbohydrate diet in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus and its effect on patients’ body mass index]. Yixue Lilun Yu Shijian [Journal of Medical Theory and Practice]. 2021;34:1316–7.
    OpenUrl
  94. [94].
    Li S, Lin G, Chen J, Chen Z, Xu F, Zhu F, et al. The effect of periodic ketogenic diet on newly diagnosed overweight or obese patients with type 2 diabetes. Bmc Endocrine Disorders. 2022;22.
  95. [95].
    Li Z-Y, Zhou Y-L. [Effect of nutritional education of low glycemic index foods on type 2 diabetic patients]. Huli Shijian Yu Yanjiu [Nursing Practice and Research]. 2011;8:7–8.
    OpenUrl
  96. [96].
    Liu K. [Dietary intervention strategies for prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus] [Ph.D.]. Chongqing: The Third Military Medical University; 2016.
  97. [97].
    Liu X, Lu Y, Li M, Gao Y, Pang G. [Effectiveness of low glycemic index diet for obese type 2 diabetes]. Shandong Yiyao [Shandong Medical Journal]. 2011;51:95–6.
    OpenUrl
  98. [98].↵
    Liu X, Qiao J, Qin Y, Yue W, Zhao Z, Shang S, et al. [Effect of ketogenic diet and energy-limiting balanced diet on body composition, blood glucose, and lipids in overweight T2DM patients]. Zhongguo Linchuang Baojian Zazhi [Chinese Journal of Clinical Healthcare]. 2020;23:823–6.
    OpenUrl
  99. [99].↵
    Lousley SE, Jones DB, Slaughter P, Carter RD, Jelfs R, Mann JI. High carbohydrate-high fibre diets in poorly controlled diabetes. Diabet Med. 1984;1:21–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  100. [100].
    Luger M, Holstein B, Schindler K, Kruschitz R, Ludvik B. Feasibility and efficacy of an isocaloric high-protein vs. standard diet on insulin requirement, body weight and metabolic parameters in patients with type 2 diabetes on insulin therapy. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2013;121:286–94.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  101. [101].
    Ma Y, Olendzki BC, Merriam PA, Chiriboga DE, Culver AL, Li W, et al. A randomized clinical trial comparing low–glycemic index versus ADA dietary education among individuals with type 2 diabetes. Nutrition. 2008;24:45–56.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  102. [102].↵
    Marco-Benedí V, Pérez-Calahorra S, Bea AM, Lamiquiz-Moneo I, Baila-Rueda L, Cenarro A, et al. High-protein energy-restricted diets induce greater improvement in glucose homeostasis but not in adipokines comparing to standard-protein diets in early-onset diabetic adults with overweight or obesity. Clin Nutr. 2020;39:1354–63.
    OpenUrl
  103. [103].
    McLaughlin T, Carter S, Lamendola C, Abbasi F, Schaaf P, Basina M, et al. Clinical efficacy of two hypocaloric diets that vary in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes - Comparison of moderate fat versus carbohydrate reductions. Diabetes Care. 2007;30:1877–9.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  104. [104].
    Mehling C. Comparison of low glycemic index high carbohydrate, high glycemic index high carbohydrate and monounsaturated fat-enriched diets on insulin sensitivity in the treatment of impaired glucose tolerance [M.Sc.]. Ann Arbor: University of Toronto (Canada); 2000.
  105. [105].
    Mohammadi S, Arefhosseini SR, Jafarabadi MA, Sharifnia Z, Ebrahimi-Mameghani M. Regulation of serum lipid profile, glucose, insulin, and adiponectin in obese diabetic women under diet therapy: A randomized clinical controlled study. Iranian Red Crescent Medical Journal. 2017;19.
  106. [106].
    Mollentze WF, Joubert G, Prins A, van der Linde S, Marx GM, Tsie KG. The safety and efficacy of a low-energy diet to induce weight loss, improve metabolic health, and induce diabetes remission in insulin-treated obese men with type 2 diabetes: a pilot RCT. Int J Diabetes Dev Ctries. 2019;39:618–25.
    OpenUrl
  107. [107].
    Nicholson AS, Sklar M, Barnard ND, Gore S, Sullivan R, Browning S. Toward improved management of NIDDM: A randomized, controlled, pilot intervention using a lowfat, vegetarian diet. Prev Med. 1999;29:87–91.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  108. [108].
    Ning G, Li W. [Effectiveness of a 30% low-carbohydrate diet in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus and the effect on patients’ blood lipid levels]. Zhongguo Chufangyao [Journal of China Prescription Drug]. 2020;18:191–2.
    OpenUrl
  109. [109].
    Parker B, Noakes M, Luscombe N, Clifton P. Effect of a high-protein, high-monounsaturated fat weight loss diet on glycemic control and lipid levels in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2002;25:425–30.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  110. [110].
    Pavithran N, Kumar H, Menon AS, Pillai GK, Sundaram KR, Ojo O. The Effect of a Low GI Diet on Truncal Fat Mass and Glycated Hemoglobin in South Indians with Type 2 Diabetes-A Single Centre Randomized Prospective Study. Nutrients. 2020;12.
  111. [111].
    Pavithran N, Kumar H, Menon AS, Pillai GK, Sundaram KR, Ojo O. South Indian cuisine with low glycemic index ingredients reduces cardiovascular risk factors in subjects with type 2 diabetes. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2020;17:1–17.
    OpenUrl
  112. [112].
    Pedersen E, Jesudason DR, Clifton PM. High protein weight loss diets in obese subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2014;24:554–62.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  113. [113].
    Perna S, Alalwan TA, Gozzer C, Infantino V, Peroni G, Gasparri C, et al. Effectiveness of a hypocaloric and low-carbohydrate diet on visceral adipose tissue and glycemic control in overweight and obese patients with type 2 diabetes. Bahrain medical bulletin. 2019;41:159–64.
    OpenUrl
  114. [114].
    Rizkalla SW, Taghrid L, Laromiguiere M, Huet D, Boillot J, Rigoir A, et al. Improved plasma glucose control, whole-body glucose utilization, and lipid profile on a low-glycemic index diet in type 2 diabetic men: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:1866–72.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  115. [115].
    Rock CL, Flatt SW, Pakiz B, Taylor KS, Leone AF, Brelje K, et al. Weight loss, glycemic control, and cardiovascular disease risk factors in response to differential diet composition in a weight loss program in type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2014;37:1573–80.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  116. [116].
    Ruggenenti P, Abbate M, Ruggiero B, Rota S, Trillini M, Aparicio C, et al. Renal and Systemic Effects of Calorie Restriction in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes With Abdominal Obesity: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Diabetes. 2017;66:75–86.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  117. [117].
    Ruggenenti P, Cortinovis M, Trillini M, Parvanova A, Abbate M, Satriano C, et al. Long-term kidney and systemic effects of calorie restriction in overweight or obese type 2 diabetic patients (C.Re.S.O. 2 randomized controlled trial). Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2022;185.
  118. [118].
    Saslow LR, Daubenmier JJ, Moskowitz JT, Kim S, Murphy EJ, Phinney SD, et al. Twelve-month outcomes of a randomized trial of a moderate-carbohydrate versus very low-carbohydrate diet in overweight adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus or prediabetes. Nutr Diabetes. 2017;7:304.
    OpenUrl
  119. [119].
    Saslow LR, Kim S, Daubenmier JJ, Moskowitz JT, Phinney SD, Goldman V, et al. A randomized pilot trial of a moderate carbohydrate diet compared to a very low carbohydrate diet in overweight or obese individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus or prediabetes. PLoS One. 2014;9:e91027.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  120. [120].
    Sato J, Kanazawa A, Makita S, Hatae C, Komiya K, Shimizu T, et al. A randomized controlled trial of 130 g/day low-carbohydrate diet in type 2 diabetes with poor glycemic control. Clin Nutr. 2017;36:992–1000.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  121. [121].
    Shen X, Bao L, Zhou H, Chen M. [Application of dietary intervention with low glycemic index in the treatment of orthopedic patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus]. Zhongguo Xiandai Yisheng [China Modern Doctor]. 2021;59:19–22.
    OpenUrl
  122. [122].↵
    Shige H, Nestel P, Sviridov D, Noakes M, Clifton P. Effect of weight reduction on the distribution of apolipoprotein A-I in high-density lipoprotein subfractions in obese non-insulin-dependent diabetic subjects. Metabolism. 2000;49:1453–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  123. [123].
    Skytte MJ, Samkani A, Petersen AD, Thomsen MN, Astrup A, Chabanova E, et al. A carbohydrate-reduced high-protein diet improves HbA1c and liver fat content in weight stable participants with type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial. Diabetologia. 2019;62:2066–78.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  124. [124].
    Stentz FB, Brewer A, Wan J, Garber C, Daniels B, Sands C, et al. Remission of pre-diabetes to normal glucose tolerance in obese adults with high protein versus high carbohydrate diet: randomized control trial. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2016;4:e000258.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  125. [125].
    Sun J-Q, Zhang X-Y, Zong M, Chen Y-Q, Sun S-J, Wu Y-M, et al. [Investigation of low glycemic index diet on blood glucose, lipid profile and body weight control in patients with type 2 diabetes]. Zhonghua Neifenmi Daixie Zazhi [Chinese Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism]. 2007;23:541–3.
    OpenUrl
  126. [126].
    Sun Q, Wu G. [Clinical efficacy of low-carbohydrate diet in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus]. Zhongguo Yaoye [China Pharmaceuticals]. 2020;29:102–3.
    OpenUrl
  127. [127].↵
    Tang W. [Clinical efficacy of 30% low-carbohydrate diet in the treatment of type 2 diabetes]. Linchuang Yanjiu [Clinical Research]. 2021;29:98–9.
    OpenUrl
  128. [128].
    Tay J, Luscombe-Marsh ND, Thompson CH, Noakes M, Buckley JD, Wittert GA, et al. Comparison of low- and high-carbohydrate diets for type 2 diabetes management: a randomized trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2015;102:780–90.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  129. [129].
    Thomsen MN, Skytte MJ, Samkani A, Carl MH, Weber P, Astrup A, et al. Dietary carbohydrate restriction augments weight loss-induced improvements in glycaemic control and liver fat in individuals with type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial. Diabetologia. 2022.
  130. [130].
    Uusitupa M, Laitinen J, Siitonen O, Vanninen E, Pyörälä K. The maintenance of improved metabolic control after intensified diet therapy in recent type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 1993;19:227–38.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  131. [131].
    Visek J, Lacigova S, Cechurova D, Rusavy Z. Comparison of a low-glycemic index vs standard diabetic diet. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub. 2014;158:112–6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  132. [132].
    Walker KZ, O’Dea K, Nicholson GC, Muir JG. Dietary composition, body weight, and NIDDM. Comparison of high-fiber, high-carbohydrate, and modified-fat diets. Diabetes Care. 1995;18:401–3.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  133. [133].
    Wang C-M. [Effect of Nutrition Therapy of Low Glycemic Index Foods on Type 2 Diabetic Patients]. Huaxi Yixue [West China Medical Journal]. 2009;24:3137–9.
    OpenUrl
  134. [134].
    Wang L-L, Wang Q, Hong Y, Jiang Q, Hou Y-Y, Wang X-H, et al. The Effect of Low-Carbohydrate Diet on Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Nutrients. 2018;10:661.
    OpenUrl
  135. [135].↵
    Wang X, Chu J, Hao S, Wei L, Shao W. [Effect of dietary intervention on glucose and lipids in elderly diabetic patients]. Zhongguo Linchuang Yanjiu [Chinese Journal of Clinical Research]. 2015;28:1319-21;25.
    OpenUrl
  136. [136].↵
    Wang Y-L, Yao Y-N, Yang X-L. [Clinical study of the changing of bodyweight (BW)and fasting blood glucose (FBG) in obese patients with type 2 diabetes on a low-carbohydrate diet (LCD)]. Xinjiang Yike Daxue Xuebao [Journal of Xinjiang Medical University]. 2009:914–6.
  137. [137].
    Watson N, Dyer K, Buckley J, Brinkworth G, Coates A, Parfitt G, et al. Effects of Low-Fat Diets Differing in Protein and Carbohydrate Content on Cardiometabolic Risk Factors during Weight Loss and Weight Maintenance in Obese Adults with Type 2 Diabetes. Nutrients. 2016;8:289.
    OpenUrl
  138. [138].
    Westman EC, Yancy WS, Jr.., Mavropoulos JC, Marquart M, McDuffie JR. The effect of a low-carbohydrate, ketogenic diet versus a low-glycemic index diet on glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Nutr Metab (Lond). 2008;5:36.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  139. [139].
    Wolever TM, Jenkins DJ, Vuksan V, Jenkins AL, Wong GS, Josse RG. Beneficial effect of low-glycemic index diet in overweight NIDDM subjects. Diabetes Care. 1992;15:562–4.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  140. [140].
    Wolever TMS, Gibbs AL, Mehling C, Chiasson JL, Connelly PW, Josse RG, et al. The Canadian Trial of Carbohydrates in Diabetes (CCD), a 1-y controlled trial of low-glycemic-index dietary carbohydrate in type 2 diabetes: No effect on glycated hemoglobin but reduction in C-reactive protein. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008;87:114–25.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  141. [141].↵
    Wu W, Liu C. [Effect of low glycemic index diet on blood glucose, blood lipid and nutritional intake in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus]. Hubei Minzu Daxue Xuebao (Yixue Ban) [Journal of Hubei Minzu University (Medical Edition)]. 2020;37:54–6.
    OpenUrl
  142. [142].
    Xue D. [Effect of a Mediterranean diet on glucose and lipid metabolism in patients with type 2 diabetes]. Shiyong Linchuang Hulixue Dianzi Zazhi [Electronic Journal of Practical Clinical Nursing Science]. 2020;6:106–7.
    OpenUrl
  143. [143].
    Yamada Y, Uchida J, Izumi H, Tsukamoto Y, Inoue G, Watanabe Y, et al. A non-calorie-restricted low-carbohydrate diet is effective as an alternative therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes. Intern Med. 2014;53:13–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  144. [144].
    Ye B, Chen L. [Effect of low glycemic index diet based on goal-setting theory on the intervention of patients with type 2 diabetes]. Tangniaobing Tiandi [Diabetes World]. 2021;18:133.
    OpenUrl
  145. [145].
    Yu Y. [Effect of low glycemic index diet in patients with type 2 diabetes]. Zhongguo Min Kang Yixue [Medical Journal of Chinese People’s Health]. 2020;32:127–9.
    OpenUrl
  146. [146].↵
    Zahedi M, Akhlagh SA, Aboomardani M, Alipoor R, Hosseini SA, Shahmirzadi AR. Efficacy of mediterranean diet on blood biochemical factors in type II diabetic patients: A randomized controlled trial. Gazi Medical Journal. 2021;31:714–8.
    OpenUrl
  147. [147].
    Zhao Y. [Effect of low glycemic index diet on glucose and lipid metabolism in patients with type 2 diabetes]. Zhongguo Baojian Yingyang [China Health Care & Nutrition]. 2018;4:41–2.
    OpenUrl
  148. [148].
    Zheng X, Zhou L, Wang J. [Influence of low glycemic index (GI) diet on glucose and lipid metabolism of patients with type 2 diabetes]. Zhongguo Xiandai Yisheng [China Modern Doctor]. 2015;53:81-3;6.
    OpenUrl
  149. [149].↵
    Zhou W. [Effects of diet interventions on glycemic control and cytokines changes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus] [M.Nurs.]. Wuhan: Zhongnan University; 2011.
  150. [150].↵
    American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. 8. Obesity and Weight Management for the Prevention and Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2022. Diabetes Care. 2021;45:S113–S24.
    OpenUrl
  151. [151].↵
    Kraus WE, Bhapkar M, Huffman KM, Pieper CF, Krupa Das S, Redman LM, et al. 2 years of calorie restriction and cardiometabolic risk (CALERIE): exploratory outcomes of a multicentre, phase 2, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2019;7:673–83.
    OpenUrl
  152. [152].↵
    Van Gaal LF, Wauters MA, De Leeuw IH. The beneficial effects of modest weight loss on cardiovascular risk factors. International journal of obesity and related metabolic disorders : journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity. 1997;21 Suppl 1:S5–9.
    OpenUrl
  153. [153].↵
    Zomer E, Gurusamy K, Leach R, Trimmer C, Lobstein T, Morris S, et al. Interventions that cause weight loss and the impact on cardiovascular risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Rev. 2016;17:1001–11.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  154. [154].↵
    Volek JS, Phinney SD, Krauss RM, Johnson RJ, Saslow LR, Gower B, et al. Alternative Dietary Patterns for Americans: Low-Carbohydrate Diets. Nutrients. 2021;13:23.
    OpenUrl
  155. [155].↵
    Brehm BJ, Seeley RJ, Daniels SR, D’Alessio DA. A Randomized Trial Comparing a Very Low Carbohydrate Diet and a Calorie-Restricted Low Fat Diet on Body Weight and Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Healthy Women. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. 2003;88:1617–23.
    OpenUrl
  156. [156].↵
    Dong J-Y, Zhang Z-L, Wang P-Y, Qin L-Q. Effects of high-protein diets on body weight, glycaemic control, blood lipids and blood pressure in type 2 diabetes: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Br J Nutr. 2013;110:781–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  157. [157].↵
    DiNicolantonio JJ, O’Keefe JH. Effects of dietary fats on blood lipids: a review of direct comparison trials. Open Heart. 2018;5:e000871.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  158. [158].↵
    Zafar MI, Mills KE, Zheng J, Regmi A, Hu SQ, Gou L, et al. Low-glycemic index diets as an intervention for diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr. 2019;110:891–902.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  159. [159].↵
    Liese AD, Schulz M, Fang F, Wolever TMS, D’Agostino RB, Jr., Sparks KC, et al. Dietary Glycemic Index and Glycemic Load, Carbohydrate and Fiber Intake, and Measures of Insulin Sensitivity, Secretion, and Adiposity in the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study. Diabetes Care. 2005;28:2832–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  160. [160].↵
    Wolever TM. Relationship between dietary fiber content and composition in foods and the glycemic index. Am J Clin Nutr. 1990;51:72–5.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  161. [161].↵
    Reynolds A, Mann J, Cummings JH, Winter N, Mete E, Te Morenga L. Carbohydrate quality and human health: a series of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Lancet. 2019;393:434–45.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  162. [162].↵
    Seidelmann SB, Claggett B, Cheng S, Henglin M, Shah A, Steffen LM, et al. Dietary carbohydrate intake and mortality: a prospective cohort study and meta-analysis. The Lancet Public Health. 2018;3:e419–e28.
    OpenUrl
  163. [163].↵
    Stephen AM, Champ MM, Cloran SJ, Fleith M, van Lieshout L, Mejborn H, et al. Dietary fibre in Europe: current state of knowledge on definitions, sources, recommendations, intakes and relationships to health. Nutr Res Rev. 2017;30:149–90.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  164. [164].↵
    Martín-Peláez S, Fito M, Castaner O. Mediterranean Diet Effects on Type 2 Diabetes Prevention, Disease Progression, and Related Mechanisms. A Review. Nutrients. 2020;12:2236.
    OpenUrl
  165. [165].↵
    Neuenschwander M, Hoffmann G, Schwingshackl L, Schlesinger S. Impact of different dietary approaches on blood lipid control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Eur J Epidemiol. 2019;34:837–52.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  166. [166].↵
    Davis C, Bryan J, Hodgson J, Murphy K. Definition of the Mediterranean Diet; A Literature Review. Nutrients. 2015;7:9139–53.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  167. [167].↵
    Martínez-González MA, Fernández-Jarne E, Serrano-Martínez M, Wright M, Gomez-Gracia E. Development of a short dietary intake questionnaire for the quantitative estimation of adherence to a cardioprotective Mediterranean diet. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2004;58:1550–2.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  168. [168].↵
    US Department of Agriculture and US Department of Health and Human Services. Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025. 9 ed 2020.
  169. [169].↵
    Dyson PA, Twenefour D, Breen C, Duncan A, Elvin E, Goff L, et al. Diabetes UK evidence-based nutrition guidelines for the prevention and management of diabetes. Diabet Med. 2018;35:541–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  170. [170].↵
    Shirani F, Salehi-Abargouei A, Azadbakht L. Effects of Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet on some risk for developing type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis on controlled clinical trials. Nutrition. 2013;29:939–47.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  171. [171].↵
    Rydhög B, Granfeldt Y, Sundquist K, Jönsson T. Paleolithic diet fraction in post hoc data analysis of a randomized cross-over study comparing Paleolithic diet with diabetes diet. Clinical Nutrition Open Science. 2021;38:73–80.
    OpenUrl
  172. [172].↵
    Appel LJ, Moore TJ, Obarzanek E, Vollmer WM, Svetkey LP, Sacks FM, et al. A clinical trial of the effects of dietary patterns on blood pressure. DASH Collaborative Research Group. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:1117–24.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  173. [173].↵
    Jönsson T, Granfeldt Y, Erlanson-Albertsson C, Ahrén B, Lindeberg S. A paleolithic diet is more satiating per calorie than a mediterranean-like diet in individuals with ischemic heart disease. Nutr Metab (Lond). 2010;7:85.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
Back to top
Posted May 31, 2022.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email
Comparative efficacy of different eating patterns in the management of type 2 diabetes and prediabetes: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Ben-tuo Zeng, Hui-qing Pan, Feng-dan Li, Zhen-yu Ye, Yang Liu, Ji-wei Du
medRxiv 2022.05.30.22275766; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.05.30.22275766
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools

Subject Area