ArticleEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2026
Are there age-related differences in glycaemic response and glycaemic index?
Article in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We previously found the glycaemic index (GI) of 3 foods to be similar in subjects aged >40 y (mean 49 y) versus <40 y (mean 29 y), but a more recent study reported the GI of 2 foods to be higher in subjects aged >55 y (mean 70 y) vs. <33 y (mean 24 y). Here, we compared the GI or relative glycaemic response (RGR, analogous to GI but using a different reference food) of the younger (age <33 y) vs. the older (age >55 y) subjects who participated in previously published studies that included n ≥ 9 in each group. Study 1, (GI, 3 foods) had n = 19:9 younger:older subjects; Study 2, (GI, 2 foods) n = 14:10; Study 3, (RGR, 1 food), n = 68:16. The GI or RGR of the 6 foods varied from 36 to 88; none differed significantly in younger vs. older and the overall means were equivalent, 63.2 vs. 63.7, respectively. The GI or RGR values for 5 foods from 3 additional studies not meeting the inclusion criteria above were also similar in younger vs. older subjects. Therefore, we found no evidence from n = 11 comparisons that GI values differ in younger vs. older subjects. However, there are insufficient data to determine if GI values are equivalent in older vs. younger subjects, something that requires a different statistical test.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42277346What 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.