Trial reportNutrients2025
Exploring CALD and Non-CALD Women's Behavioral and Dietary Responses to a Low-Intensity Intervention for Gestational Diabetes.
Trial report in Nutrients, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesCultural backgrounds can shape dietary beliefs, food preferences, and attitudes toward health interventions. However, limited research has explored adherence or behavioral responses following a dietary intervention in women from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds. This secondary analysis of a randomized controlled feasibility trial in women with gestational diabetes (GDM) explored differences in adherence, satisfaction, and behavior change between CALD and White (non-CALD) women.
methodsThirty-eight participants were randomized to the dietary intervention (individualized, culturally tailored dietary advice) or standard care. Data collected at baseline (26-32 weeks' gestation) and end of study (close to delivery) included a behavior change questionnaire, a 10-point Likert scale for adherence and satisfaction with the intervention, and 24-h dietary recall.
resultsEighteen participants self-reported as CALD and 20 self-reported as non-CALD. All intervention group participants, irrespective of cultural background, were motivated to make dietary changes, with similar mean [95% CI] adherence scores (CALD: 8.10 [7.27, 8.94] vs. non-CALD: 7.58 [6.66, 8.51]), and satisfaction scores to the intervention (CALD: 7.85 [6.96, 8.74] vs. non-CALD 6.88 [5.89, 7.86]). Within the intervention or standard care groups there were no differences in dietary intake between CALD and non-CALD participants.
conclusionsA low-intensity individualized dietary intervention for GDM was similarly acceptable and feasible for our small group of CALD and non-CALD participants. Findings support the potential for broadly applicable dietary strategies in antenatal care but also highlight the need for more culturally nuanced research to ensure inclusive interventions.
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.