Skip to main content

Table 2 HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose, HOMA-IR, and HOMA-β according to dietary glycemic index and energy-adjusted dietary glycemic load 1

From: Dietary glycemic index and glycemic load in relation to HbA1c in Japanese obese adults: a cross-sectional analysis of the Saku Control Obesity Program

Dietary variables

n

HbA1c %

P for trend*

Fasting plasma glucose mg/dL

P for trend*

HOMA-IR

P for trend*

HOMA-β

P for trend*

Quartile of glycemic index 2

         

Q1 [60]

57

6.3 (5.7, 6.9)

0.991

116 (101, 131)

0.900

3.0 (1.7, 4.3)

0.379

77 (37, 116)

0.392

Q2 [65]

57

6.7 (6.0, 7.3)

 

120 (105, 136)

 

3.7 (2.4, 5.0)

 

90 (49, 132)

 

Q3 [68]

57

6.4 (5.8, 7.0)

 

117 (102, 132)

 

3.1 (1.8, 4.4)

 

78 (38, 118)

 

Q4 [71]

56

6.4 (5.8, 6.9)

 

117 (103, 131)

 

2.6 (1.4, 3.8)

 

66 (28, 103)

 

Quartile of glycemic load 2

Q1 [58]

57

6.2 (5.5, 6.8)

0.044

116 (101, 131)

0.322

2.7 (1.3, 4.0)

0.250

65 (24, 105)

0.428

Q2 [75]

57

6.2 (5.5, 6.8)

 

111 (97, 126)

 

2.4 (1.1, 3.7)

 

68 (28, 109)

 

Q3 [86]

57

6.6 (6.0, 7.2)

 

124 (110, 139)

 

3.1 (1.8, 4.5)

 

70 (30, 110)

 

Q4 [100]

56

6.5 (5.9, 7.1)

 

117 (103, 130)

 

3.0 (1.8, 4.2)

 

76 (38, 113)

 
  1. Abbreviations: HOMA-IR, homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance; HOMA-β, homeostasis model assessment for β-cell function.
  2. 1 Adjusted mean levels and 95% CI in parentheses. Glycemic load was defined as an indicator of blood glucose induced by an individual’s total available carbohydrate.
  3. 2 Median value for each quartile in brackets. *A multiple linear regression model was used to adjust for potential confounding factors including age, sex, visceral fat area, total energy intake, and physical activity level.