Last updated August 24, 2026
Key finding
TIR improved from 84.3% to 90.3% (P = 0.041)
This study investigated the effects of caloric restriction on glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes and obesity, finding significant improvements in several key metrics.
Quick read
The essential study design details in one scan.
EvidenceScore™
Moderate
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Medium-Term (3–12 mo)
Risk of bias
Some Concerns
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Plain-language summary
A plain-language read of the study’s main message and where it applies.
Study focus
This study investigated the effects of caloric restriction on glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes and obesity, finding significant improvements in several key metrics.
These findings are clinically significant as they suggest that caloric restriction can be an effective strategy for improving glycemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes and obesity. This approach may help reduce the risk of diabetes-related complications and improve overall health outcomes.
The study had a single-arm design, limiting comparisons. Changes in C-peptide index were not significant, indicating potential measurement limitations. The generalizability of findings may be limited to similar populations.
Published in
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Jinyoung K, Joonyub L, Mee KK, et al. Caloric restriction improves glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes and obesity. Journal of Diabetes Investigation. 2026;17(7):1106-1114. doi:10.1111/jdi.70308
Time in range (TIR) improved from 84.3% to 90.3% (P = 0.041)
BMI decreased from 29.3 to 26.7 kg/m² (P < 0.001)
Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) decreased from 127.8 mg/dL to 110.2 mg/dL (P < 0.001)
Glycemic variability (CV) decreased significantly (P < 0.001)
Evidence network
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
This study contributes evidence to Continuous glucose monitoring and 2-hour plasma glucose, BMI, C-peptide index (CPI), and 7 more.
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
Continuous glucose monitoring
Primary outcomes
Primary intervention
Primary outcomes
Intervention and outcome relationships this study adds to the evidence network.
Editorial context
See why this paper is useful beyond its individual results.
Evidence network role
This section describes how the study fits into the current evidence network. It does not determine whether an intervention works on its own.
7
Related topics
10
Evidence pairs
1934
Related studies
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Save studies and evidence pages, organize your personal Evidence Tracker, and keep the research you care about in one place.
Primary evidence
Evidence relationship
Related evidence
Evidence relationship
Save evidence
Evidence relationship
Save evidence
Core evidence
The primary outcomes reported in this study.
Continuous glucose monitoring → 2-hour plasma glucose
Continuous glucose monitoring → 2-hour plasma glucose
Continuous glucose monitoring → C-peptide index (CPI)
Continuous glucose monitoring → C-peptide index (CPI)
Continuous glucose monitoring → Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)
Continuous glucose monitoring → Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)
Continuous glucose monitoring → Indices of 24-hour glycemic variability
Continuous glucose monitoring → Indices of 24-hour glycemic variability
Continuous glucose monitoring → Matsuda index improvement
Continuous glucose monitoring → Matsuda index improvement
Continuous glucose monitoring → Mean glucose levels measured during the intervention
Continuous glucose monitoring → Mean glucose levels measured during the intervention
Continuous glucose monitoring → Time above range
Continuous glucose monitoring → Time above range
Continuous glucose monitoring → Time below range
Continuous glucose monitoring → Time below range
Continuous glucose monitoring → Time in range
Continuous glucose monitoring → Time in range
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Explore related studies, evidence collections, and research questions.
Relationships organized using the Dediabetes Evidence Intelligence™ framework.
This study contributes to evidence on Insulin Delivery Systems and CGM Time in Range, Insulin Delivery Systems and CGM Time in Range.
This study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.
Devices & Technology
Devices & Technology
Curated evidence collections and hubs this study is part of.
All studies measuring CGM Time in Range
Measures CGM Time in Range as a key outcome.
All studies on Insulin Delivery Systems
Contributes to Insulin Delivery Systems evidence base.
Latest published studies
Published within the last 2 years.
Jump to pre-filtered views in Evidence Explorer.
16 results
5 results
16 results
16 results
5 results
Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.
Insulin Delivery Systems may improve CGM Time in Range.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are generally consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
Time in range
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 87.6 | moderate positive | ConsistencyScore™ Generally Consistent | 1 study
Time above range
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 82.7 | weak positive | ConsistencyScore™ Mixed | 1 study
Time below range
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 79.0 | weak positive | ConsistencyScore™ Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 38 supporting studies with generally consistent results and a positive effect signal.
Insulin Delivery Systems may improve fasting glucose.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 79.0 | weak positive | ConsistencyScore™ Generally Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 9 supporting studies with consistent results and a positive effect signal.
Insulin Delivery Systems may improve postprandial and ogtt glucose.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are mixed and should be interpreted cautiously.
Ranked evidence signals
2-hour plasma glucose
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 78.0 | moderate positive | ConsistencyScore™ Generally Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is cautious because the available studies report mixed findings.
Insulin Delivery Systems may affect body mass index.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are generally consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
BMI
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 79.0 | weak positive | ConsistencyScore™ Generally Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 3 supporting studies with generally consistent results and a positive effect signal.
Next steps
Choose a next path through related evidence topics, Evidence Explorer views, and research summaries.
Follow the topics this study contributes to.
Open broader Evidence Explorer views for this relationship.
Read related research summaries.
Focused on evidence, not advertising.
Your data is always protected.
New studies added every day.
