Diet, nutrition and the prevention of type 2 diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The overall objective of this study was to evaluate and provide evidence and recommendations on current published literature about diet and lifestyle in the prevention of type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: Epidemiological and experimental studies, focusing on nutritional intervention in the prevention of type 2 diabetes are used to make disease-specific recommendations. Long-term cohort studies are given the most weight as to strength of evidence available. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: Numerous clinical trials and cohort studies in low, middle and high income countries are evaluated regarding recommendations for dietary prevention of type 2 diabetes. These include, among others, the Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study, US Diabetes Prevention Program, Da Qing Study; Pima Indian Study; Iowa Women's Health Study; and the study of the US Male Physicians. RESULTS: There is convincing evidence for a decreased risk of diabetes in adults who are physically active and maintain a normal body mass index (BMI) throughout adulthood, and in overweight adults with impaired glucose tolerance who lose weight voluntarily. An increased risk for developing type 2 diabetes is associated with overweight and obesity; abdominal obesity; physical inactivity; and maternal diabetes. It is probable that a high intake of saturated fats and intrauterine growth retardation also contribute to an increased risk, while non-starch polysaccharides are likely to be associated with a decreased risk. From existing evidence it is also possible that omega-3 fatty acids, low glycaemic index foods and exclusive breastfeeding may play a protective role, and that total fat intake and trans fatty acids may contribute to the risk. However, insufficient evidence is currently available to provide convincing proof. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the strength of available evidence regarding diet and lifestyle in the prevention of type 2 diabetes, it is recommended that a normal weight status in the lower BMI range (BMI 21-23) and regular physical activity be maintained throughout adulthood; abdominal obesity be prevented; and saturated fat intake be less than 7% of the total energy intake.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".