MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146581721 · doi:10.1186/1758-5996-6-127

Effects of diet and exercise interventions on diabetes risk factors in adults without diabetes: meta-analyses of controlled trials

2014· article· en· W2146581721 on OpenAlexaff
Ranga Appuhamy, E. Kebreab, Mitchell Simon, Rickey Y. Yada, L. P. Milligan, J. France

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetology & Metabolic Syndrome · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusPsychological interventionMeta-analysisMEDLINEPhysical therapyInternal medicineGerontologyEndocrinologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Fasting insulin (FI), fasting glucose (FG), systolic blood pressure (SBP), high density lipoproteins (HDL), triacylglycerides (TAG), and body mass index (BMI) are well-known risk factors for type 2 diabetes. Reliable estimates of lifestyle intervention effects on these factors allow diabetes risk to be predicted accurately. The present meta-analyses were conducted to quantitatively summarize effects of diet and exercise intervention programs on FI, FG, SBP, HDL, TAG and BMI in adults without diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched to find studies involving diet plus exercise interventions. Studies were required to use adults not diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, involve both dietary and exercise counseling, and include changes in diabetes risk factors as outcome measures. Data from 18, 24, 23, 30, 29 and 29 studies were used for the analyses of FI, FG, SBP, HDL, TAG and BMI, respectively. About 60% of the studies included exclusively overweight or obese adults. Mean age and BMI of participants at baseline were 48 years and 30.1 kg/m(2). Heterogeneity of intervention effects was first estimated using random-effect models and explained further with mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Adults receiving diet and exercise education for approximately one year experienced significant (P <0.001) reductions in FI (-2.56 ± 0.58 mU/L), FG (-0.18 ± 0.04 mmol/L), SBP (-2.77 ± 0.56 mm Hg), TAG (-0.258 ± 0.037 mmol/L) and BMI (-1.61 ± 0.13 kg/m(2)). These risk factor changes were related to a mean calorie intake reduction of 273 kcal/d, a mean total fat intake reduction of 6.3%, and 40 minutes of moderate intensity aerobic exercise four times a week. Lifestyle intervention did not have an impact on HDL. More than 99% of total variability in the intervention effects was due to heterogeneity. Variability in calorie and fat intake restrictions, exercise type and duration, length of the intervention period, and the presence or absence of glucose, insulin, or lipid abnormalities explained 23-63% of the heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: Calorie and total fat intake restrictions coupled with moderate intensity aerobic exercises significantly improved diabetes risk factors in healthy normoglycemic adults although normoglycemic adults with glucose, insulin, and lipid abnormalities appear to benefit more.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0270.061
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetology & Metabolic SyndromeSame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207