ReviewExperimental physiology2026
Therapeutic potential of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus) in dysglycaemia and metabolic dysfunction: A systematic review and meta-analysis across the diabetes spectrum.
Review in Experimental physiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate comprehensively the therapeutic potential of Abelmoschus esculentus (okra) supplementation across the diabetes spectrum of key metabolic risk factors. A search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library, up to 23 July 2025, to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of okra supplementation on metabolic risk factors in diabetes. Fourteen randomized controlled trials published between 2020 and 2025, including a total of 836 participants, were analysed. Okra supplementation led to significant reductions in 2 h postprandial glucose [weighted mean difference (WMD) = -22.39 mg/dL, 95% confidence interval (CI): -41.39 to -3.38; P = 0.021], fasting blood sugar (WMD = -23.66 mg/dL, 95% CI: -34.20 to -13.12; P < 0.001), glycosylated haemoglobin (WMD = -0.30%, 95% CI: -0.59 to -0.02; P = 0.034), homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (WMD = -0.59 units, 95% CI: -1.01 to -0.18; P = 0.005), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (WMD = -8.55 mg/dL, 95% CI: -14.42 to -2.68; P = 0.004) and total cholesterol (WMD = -12.58 mg/dL, 95% CI: -22.78 to -2.37; P = 0.016) levels. The certainty of evidence was very low for most outcomes, except for diastolic blood pressure and glycosylated haemoglobin, which were rated as low. Regarding methodological quality, six trials were rated as good, two as fair and six as poor. Okra supplementation might improve glycaemic control and lipid profiles, indicating its potential as a complementary approach in diabetes management. Despite limitations from small and heterogeneous trials, these findings support future research on optimal dosing, safety and personalized applications in metabolic disease management.
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.