MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046587057 · doi:10.1093/nutrit/nuz082

Low-carbohydrate diets and cardiometabolic health: the importance of carbohydrate quality over quantity

2019· review· en· W3046587057 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition Reviews · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersUniversity of TorontoAmerican Society for NutritionCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Dried Fruit Trade Association
KeywordsHyperinsulinemiaGlycemic indexCarbohydrateWeight lossMedicineDiabetes mellitusGlycemic loadEndocrinologyInsulinInternal medicineObesityGlycemicPhysiologyInsulin resistance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carbohydrates are increasingly being implicated in the epidemics of obesity, diabetes, and their downstream cardiometabolic diseases. The "carbohydrate-insulin model" has been proposed to explain this role of carbohydrates. It posits that a high intake of carbohydrate induces endocrine deregulation marked by hyperinsulinemia, leading to energy partitioning with increased storage of energy in adipose tissue resulting in adaptive increases in food intake and decreases in energy expenditure. Whether all carbohydrate foods under real-world feeding conditions directly contribute to weight gain and its complications or whether this model can explain these clinical phenomena requires close inspection. The aim of this review is to assess the evidence for the role of carbohydrate quantity vs quality in cardiometabolic health. Although the clinical investigations of the "carbohydrate-insulin model" have shown the requisite decreases in insulin secretion and increases in fat oxidation, there has been a failure to achieve the expected fat loss under low-carbohydrate feeding. Systematic reviews with pairwise and network meta-analyses of the best available evidence have failed to show the superiority of low-carbohydrate diets on long-term clinical weight loss outcomes or that all sources of carbohydrate behave equally. High-carbohydrate diets that emphasize foods containing important nutrients and substances, including high-quality carbohydrate such as whole grains (especially oats and barley), pulses, or fruit; low glycemic index and load; or high fiber (especially viscous fiber sources) decrease intermediate cardiometabolic risk factors in randomized trials and are associated with weight loss and decreased incidence of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and cardiovascular mortality in prospective cohort studies. The evidence for sugars as a marker of carbohydrate quality appears to be highly dependent on energy control (comparator) and food source (matrix), with sugar-sweetened beverages providing excess energy showing evidence of harm, and with high-quality carbohydrate food sources containing sugars such as fruit, 100% fruit juice, yogurt, and breakfast cereals showing evidence of benefit in energy-matched substitutions for refined starches (low-quality carbohydrate food sources). These data reflect the current shift in dietary guidance that allows for flexibility in the proportion of macronutrients (including carbohydrates) in the diet, with a focus on quality over quantity and dietary patterns over single nutrients.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.276 · 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