Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Including indigestible carbohydrates in the evening meal of healthy subjects improves glucose tolerance, lowers inflammatory markers, and increases satiety after a subsequent standardized breakfast.



Key Questions Addressed
1 Is this a fiber intervention study?
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Including indigestible carbohydrates in the evening meal of healthy subjects improves glucose tolerance, lowers inflammatory markers, and increases satiety after a subsequent standardized breakfast.
Author Nilsson AC., Ostman EM., Holst JJ., Björck IM.
Country Division of Applied Nutrition and Food Chemistry, Department of Food Technology, Engineering and Nutrition, Lund University, SE-22100 Lund, Sweden. anne.nilsson@appliednutrition.lth.se
Year 2008
Numbers Pubmed ID: 18356328

Secondary Publication Information
There are currently no secondary publications defined for this study.


Extraction Form: Fiber Database
Arms
No arms have been defined in this extraction form.

Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Year of Publication 2008
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Country of Publication Sweden
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What was the study design? Randomized Controlled Trial (Crossover)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Was the study blinded? unspecified
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study diet type acute feeding study
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Level of feeding control for dietary intervention All food provided
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Sample size 17
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Is there a run-in period? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Is there a washout period? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Did the administered fiber dose change over the course of the study? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What is the age of the population (categorical)? Adults (20+ Years)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study population, mean age in years 25.9
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study population, age range in years 22-32
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study Population, mean BMI, kg/m2 22.5
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study population, BMI Range, kg/m2 NR
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Baseline health status Healthy
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Gender (% male) 64.7
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 1-type Barley Kernels
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 1-if combination was selected for fiber type, 1st fiber type in combination test meal 1: OB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 1-if combination was selected for fiber type, 2nd fiber type in combination test meal 2: cutOB
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 1- dose 1 (g) 10.7g DF and 9.5g RS
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 1- dose 2 (g) 10.6g DF and 8.8g RS
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 1-Duration of intervention ~12 hours
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 1-how was the fiber administered? Test Meal
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 2-type Barley Kernels
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 2-if combination was selected for fiber type, 1st fiber type in combination -
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 2-if combination was selected for fiber type, 2nd fiber type in combination -
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 2- dose 1 (g) 16.1g DF and 22.0g RS
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 2- dose 2 (g) -
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 2-Duration of intervention ~12 hours
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 2-how was the fiber administered? Test Meal
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 3-type Barley Kernels
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 3-if combination was selected for fiber type, 1st fiber type in combination -
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 3-if combination was selected for fiber type, 2nd fiber type in combination -
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 3- dose 1 (g) 50.1g DF and 30.9g RS
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 3- dose 2 (g) -
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 3-Duration of intervention ~12 hours
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 3-how was the fiber administered? Test Meal
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 4-type Combination/Mixture
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 4-if combination was selected for fiber type, 1st fiber type in combination RS2 from corn starch
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 4-if combination was selected for fiber type, 2nd fiber type in combination barley fiber
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 4- dose 1 (g) 8.8
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 4- dose 2 (g) 10.3
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 4-Duration of intervention ~12 hours
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fiber 4-how was the fiber administered? Test Meal
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 1- what was the comparator used in the intervention? white wheat flour
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 1-dose -
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 1-duration of comparator intervention ~12 hours
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 1-how was the comparator administered to participants? Test Meal
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 2- what was the comparator used in the intervention? barley kernels (half-dose)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 2-dose -
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 2-duration of comparator intervention ~12 hours
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 2-how was the comparator administered to participants? Test Meal
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 3- what was the comparator used in the intervention? white wheat bread with RS from corn starch
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 3-dose -
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 3-duration of comparator intervention ~12 hours
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 3-how was the comparator administered to participants? Test Meal
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 4- what was the comparator used in the intervention? -
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 4-dose -
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 4-duration of comparator intervention -
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparator 4-how was the comparator administered to participants? -
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |


Baseline Characteristics
No baseline characteristics have been defined for this extraction form.



Results & Comparisons

No Results found.
Adverse Events
Arm or Total Title Description Comments

Quality Dimensions
No quality dimensions were specified.

Quality Rating
No quality rating data was found.