Trial reportThe American journal of clinical nutrition2025
Imprecision nutrition? Intraindividual variability of glucose responses to duplicate presented meals in adults without diabetes.
Trial report in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Effect of Ultra Processed Versus Unprocessed Diets on Energy Intake
Effect of Low Fat Versus Low Carbohydrate Diets on Energy Metabolism
Food_i Sense Analytics: Integrando la Inteligencia Artificial Con la monitorización Continua de la Glucosa Para la nutrición de precisión
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Continuous glucose monitor overestimates glycemia, with the magnitude of bias varying by postprandial test and individual - a randomized crossover trial.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2025Trial
- Agreement of Over-the-Counter Continuous Glucose Monitors With Capillary-Meter Glucose in Young Adults Without Diabetes.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2026Article
- Impact of Post-Cooking Storage on the Glycemic Profile of Boiled Rice: Integrating Glycemic Index, Resistant Starch, and Post-Technological Stability.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Metabolism and the Mind: Investigating the Link Between Glucose Control and Reinforcement Learning in Humans.Biological psychiatry global open science · 2026Article
- Glucose levels are associated with mood, but the association is mediated by ratings of metabolic state.EBioMedicine · 2026Observational
- Nutrigenomics meets multi-omics: integrating genetic, metabolic, and microbiome data for personalized nutrition strategies.Genes & nutrition · 2025Review
- Protocol of a Series ofCurrent developments in nutrition · 2025Article
- Continuous Glucose Monitoring in People at High Risk of Diabetes and Dysglycaemia: Transforming Early Risk Detection and Personalised Care.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Glycemic response to SSBs and ASBs: the role of mixed meals and individual variability.Nutrition journal · 2025Article
- Biological vs. Chronological Overnight Fasting: Influence of Last Evening Meal on Morning Glucose in Dysglycemia.Nutrients · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundContinuous glucose monitors (CGMs) are used to characterize postprandial glucose responses and provide personalized dietary advice to minimize glucose excursions. The efficacy of such advice depends on reliable glucose responses.
objectivesTo explore within-subject variability of CGM responses to duplicate presented meals in an inpatient setting.
methodsCGM data were collected from two inpatient feeding studies in 30 participants without diabetes, capturing 1189 responses to duplicate meals presented ∼1 wk apart from four dietary patterns. One study used two different CGMs (Abbott Freestyle Libre Pro and Dexcom G4 Platinum) whereas the other study used only Dexcom. We calculated the incremental area under the curve (iAUC) for glucose for each 2-h postmeal period and compared within-subject, within-CGM responses to duplicate presented meals using linear correlations, intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), and Bland-Altman analyses. Individual variability of interstitial glucose responses to duplicate meals were also compared with different meals using standard deviations (SDs).
resultsThere were weak-to-moderate positive linear correlations between within-subject iAUCs for duplicate meals [Abbott r = 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38, 0.54, P < 0.0001 and Dexcom r = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.39, 0.50, P < 0.0001], with low within-participant reliability indicated by ICC (Abbott 0.28, Dexcom 0.17). Bland-Altman analyses indicated wide limits of agreement (LoA) (Abbott -29.8 to 28.4 mg/dL and Dexcom -29.4 to 32.1 mg/dL) but small bias of mean iAUCs for duplicate meals (Abbott -0.7 mg/dL and Dexcom 1.3 mg/dL). The individual variability of interstitial glucose responses to duplicate meals was similar to that of different meals evaluated each diet week for both Abbott [SD
conclusionsIndividual postprandial CGM responses to duplicate meals were highly variable in adults without diabetes. Personalized diet advice on the basis of CGM measurements requires more reliable methods involving aggregated repeated measurements. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03407053 and NCT03878108.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.