Effects of raisins on postprandial glucose and insulin responses in healthy individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background In light of evidence demonstrating improvements in glycemic control with moderate fructose intake and low glycemic index fruits, our aim was to determine the glycemic and insulinemic indices and postprandial responses to raisins in an acute‐feed setting. Methods 10 healthy participants (4M, 6F) consumed breakfast study meals on four occasions over a 2–8wk period: Meal 1, white bread [WB] (108g WB; 50g available CHO) served as the control and was consumed on two separate occasions; Meal 2, Raisins [R50] (69g raisins; 50g available CHO); and Meal 3, Raisins [R20] (1 serving, 28g raisins; 20g available carbohydrate). Postprandial glucose and insulin was measured over a 2hr period for the determination of glycemic index (GI), glycemic load (GL) and insulin index (II). Results The raisin meals, R50 and R20, resulted in significantly reduced postprandial glucose and insulin responses when compared to WB (P<0.05). Furthermore, raisins were determined to be low GI, GL and II foods. Conclusions The favorable effect of raisins on postprandial glycemic response, their insulin‐sparing effect, low GI combined with their other metabolic benefits may indicate that raisins are a healthy choice not only for the general population but also for individuals with diabetes or insulin resistance.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".