Glycaemic and insulinaemic impact of oats soaked overnight in milk vs. cream of rice with and without sugar, nuts, and seeds: a randomized, controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Soaking oats overnight in milk renders them ready to eat the next morning, however, it is unknown whether oats prepared this way will retain its relatively low glycaemic and insulinaemic impact. Therefore, we compared the glycaemic, insulinaemic and subjective hunger responses elicited by oats soaked overnight in 110 g skim-milk (ONO) vs. cooked cream of rice cereal (CR), both with and without inclusions. SUBJECTS/METHODS: The project was performed at two research centers (Toronto, Winnipeg) as two separate studies each using a randomized, cross-over design with similar methods. The glycaemic and insulinaemic responses of overnight-fasted participants without diabetes (males:females: Toronto, 24:16; Winnipeg, 20:20) were measured for 3 h after consuming CR and ONO fed alone (Toronto) or with added sugar, nuts, and seeds (CRsns and ONOsns) (Winnipeg). Participants rated subjective hunger using visual analog scales. Data were analyzed by paired t-test. The primary endpoint was 0-2 h incremental area under the curve (iAUC) for glucose. RESULTS: Mean glucose iAUC was 33% less, after ONO than CR (mean difference was 39 (51-27) mmol × min/l, p < 0.0001) and 24% less, after ONOsns than CRsns (mean difference was 43 (65-21) mmol × min/l, p = 0.0003). Serum-insulin iAUC was 33% less, after ONO than CR (mean difference 57 (81-40) pmol × hl, p < 0.0001) and 32% less, after ONOsns than CRsns (966 (1360-572) pmol × h/l, p < 0.0001). In both Toronto and Winnipeg, subjective hunger ratings were similar across the two treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Oats prepared by soaking overnight in skimmed milk without and with inclusions retain their relatively low glycaemic and insulinaemic impact.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".