Association Between a Low Carbohydrate Diet, Quality of Life, and Glycemic Control in Australian Adults Living With Type 1 Diabetes: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Globally, the prevalence of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is rising. In 2020, a total of 124,652 Australians had T1DM. Maintaining optimal glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c ≤7.0%, ≤53 mmol/mol) on a standard carbohydrate diet can be a challenge for people living with T1DM. The Diabetes Complications and Control Trial established that macrovascular and microvascular complications could be reduced by improving glycemic control. Recent studies have found that a very low or low carbohydrate diet can improve glycemic control. However, the overall evidence relating to an association between a very low or low carbohydrate diet and glycemic control in people living with T1DM is both limited and mixed. In addition, research has suggested that a reduced quality of life due to anxiety and depression adversely influences glycemic control. Despite a potential link between a very low or low carbohydrate diet and optimal glycemic control, to our knowledge, no research has examined an association between a low carbohydrate diet, quality of life, and glycemic control, making this study unique in its approach. Objective The study aims to develop a validated diabetes-specific quality of life questionnaire for use in Australian adults with T1DM and to determine if an association exists between a low carbohydrate diet, quality of life, and glycemic control in Australian adults living with T1DM. Methods This cross-sectional study will be conducted in a tertiary hospital outpatient setting and will consist of 3 phases: phase 1, online Australian diabetes-specific quality of life questionnaire development and piloting (25-30 adults with T1DM); phase 2, questionnaire validation (364 adults with T1DM); and phase 3, a 12-week dietary intervention to determine if an association exists between a low carbohydrate diet, quality of life, and glycemic control in adults with T1DM (16-23 adults with T1DM). The validation of the study-developed Australian diabetes-specific quality of life questionnaire, and changes in hemoglobin A1c and quality of life in adults with T1DM while undertaking a low carbohydrate diet over 12 weeks will be the primary outcomes of this study. Results Phase 1 of the study is currently open for recruitment and has recruited 12 participants to date. It is anticipated that the first results will be submitted for publication in November 2021. Presently, no results are available. Conclusions This study is the first of its kind in that it will be the first to generate a new validated instrument, which could be used in evidence-based practice and research to understand the quality of life of Australian adults with T1DM. Second, the low carbohydrate dietary intervention outcomes could be used to inform clinicians about an alternative approach to assist T1DM adults in improving their quality of life and glycemic control. Finally, this study could warrant the development of an evidence-based low carbohydrate dietary guideline for adults living with T1DM with the potential to have a profound impact on this population. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04213300; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04213300 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/25085
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 | 0.040 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.005 |
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".