Skip to main content

Table 3 Lipids and blood pressure 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

LDL mg/dL

P for trend*

HDL mg/dL

P for trend*

TG mg/dL

P for trend*

SBP mmHg

P for trend*

DBP mmHg

P for trend*

Quartile of glycemic index 2

Q1 [60]

57

116 (97, 134)

0.457

45 (39, 52)

0.195

156 (98, 214)

0.987

125 (115, 136)

0.686

78 (70, 85)

0.677

Q2 [65]

57

109 (89, 128)

44 (38, 51)

150 (90, 211)

129 (118, 140)

79 (71, 87)

Q3 [68]

57

108 (89, 126)

48 (42, 54)

158 (99, 217)

128 (117, 138)

81 (73, 88)

Q4 [71]

56

112 (95, 130)

47 (42, 53)

154 (100, 209)

124 (113, 134)

75 (68, 83)

Quartile of glycemic load2

Q1 [58]

57

111 (92, 130)

0.579

47 (40, 53)

0.831

179 (120, 238)

0.171

127 (116, 138)

0.387

78 (70, 86)

0.509

Q2 [75]

57

105 (86, 124)

48 (42, 54)

148 (90, 206)

125 (114, 136)

78 (71, 86)

Q3 [86]

57

109 (90, 127)

46 (39, 52)

155 (96, 214)

120 (109, 130)

75 (67, 83)

Q4 [100]

56

115 (98, 133)

47 (41, 53)

151 (96, 205)

126 (116, 136)

78 (70, 85)

  1. 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.
  2. 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.