Evidence mapPaperPMID 30158516Full record

Trial reportNutrition & diabetes2018

Very high-protein and low-carbohydrate enteral nutrition formula and plasma glucose control in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized crossover trial.

Maureen B Huhmann, Shinobu Yamamoto, Joel M Neutel, Sarah S Cohen, Juan B Ochoa Gautier

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Nutrition & diabetes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Efficacy of Ma'aljobon Aftimouni (Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Maureen B HuhmannClinical Sciences, Nestlé Health Science, 1007 US Highway 202/206, Building JR2, Bridgewater, NJ, 08807, USA. Maureen.huhmann@us.nestle.com.
Shinobu YamamotoClinical Sciences, Nestlé Health Science, 1007 US Highway 202/206, Building JR2, Bridgewater, NJ, 08807, USA.
Joel M NeutelOrange County Research Center, 14351 Myford Road, Suite B, Tustin, CA, 92780, USA.
Sarah S CohenEpidStat Institute, 2100 Commonwealth Blvd, Suite 203, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA.
Juan B Ochoa GautierClinical Sciences, Nestlé Health Science, 1007 US Highway 202/206, Building JR2, Bridgewater, NJ, 08807, USA.
Nestlé Health Science (United States)Geisinger Medical Center · USMichigan United · USOrange County Research Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesStandard enteral nutrition (EN) formulas can  worsen hyperglycemia in diabetic patients. We hypothesized that altering the proportion of macronutrients in a formula; increasing protein while decreasing carbohydrate concentrations would improve glycemic response. The objective of this study was to demonstrate that an EN formula containing a very high concentration of protein (in the form of whey peptides) and low concentration of carbohydrate provide better control of postprandial blood glucose relative to a very high-protein/higher-carbohydrate formula. SUBJECTS AND

methodsThis was a randomized crossover clinical trial of 12 ambulatory adult subjects with type 2 diabetes. The primary outcome was glycemic response following a bolus of isocaloric amounts of two EN formulas; the secondary outcome was insulin response. Subjects were randomized to the experimental or the control formula, on two separate days, 5-7 days apart.

resultsMean blood glucose concentrations at 10-180 min post-infusion and mean area under the curve for glucose over 240 min post-infusion were significantly lower with the experimental formula than with the control formula (71.99 ± 595.18 and 452.62 ± 351.38, respectively; p = 0.025). There were no significant differences in the mean insulin concentrations over time, insulinogenic indices, and first-phase insulin measurements.

conclusionsAn EN formula containing high-protein and low-carbohydrate loads can significantly improve glucose control in subjects with type 2 diabetes in ambulatory settings as evidenced by observed improved glucose control without significant difference in insulin response.

Indexed as

Diet, High-Protein Low-CarbohydrateEnteral NutritionFood, FormulatedBlood GlucoseCross-Over StudiesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedTreatment OutcomeBlood Glucose

Identifiers

PMID30158516
PMCPMC6115411
OpenAlexW2889523488

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.