Evidence Intelligence™
- EvidenceScore™
- Emerging
- Score 59 · Based on 1 study
- ImpactScore™
- 50
- Neutral
- ConsistencyScore™
- unclear
- Not enough independent studies
Supporting studies: Based on 1 study
Add to Evidence TrackerResearch Summary
Analyzed using Evidence Intelligence™
Group-Based Education Shows No Clear Advantage for Glycemic Control
Last updated September 2, 2026
Key finding
HbA1c changed by -2 mmol/mol (95% CI -5 to 0); p = 0.663.
This study evaluated the effectiveness of group-based dietary interventions on glycemic control in adults with Type 1 diabetes, finding unclear effectiveness across different measures.
Quick read
Study at a glance
The essential study design details in one scan.
EvidenceScore™
Moderate
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Long-Term (1–5 y)
Risk of bias
Some Concerns
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Plain-language summary
What this paper says
A plain-language read of the study’s main message and where it applies.
Study focus
This study evaluated the effectiveness of group-based dietary interventions on glycemic control in adults with Type 1 diabetes, finding unclear effectiveness across different measures.
Clinical relevance
Understanding the effectiveness of dietary interventions is crucial for managing Type 1 diabetes, as optimal glycemic control can reduce the risk of complications. This study highlights the need for further research into effective strategies for dietary management in this population.
Keep in mind
Unclear effectiveness of interventions on glycemic control Limited statistical significance in outcome measures Potential lack of generalizability to broader populations
Published in
Journal Reference
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Bettina E, Martin BB, Jens MB, Tina V, Antonio P. Effectiveness of Group-Based Programs for Glycemic Control in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes. Nutrients. 2024;16(21):3745. doi:10.3390/nu16213745
Main Effects
HbA1c changed by -2 mmol/mol (p = 0.663)
HbA1c changed by -4 mmol/mol (p = 0.779)
MAGE changed by -0.3 mmol/L (p = 0.590)
Evidence network
How this study fits
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
Evidence Context
This study contributes evidence to Advanced Carbohydrate Counting (ACC), Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) and HbA1c, Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE).
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
Advanced Carbohydrate Counting (ACC)
Primary outcomes
- HbA1c
- Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)
Evidence topics
Primary intervention
Primary outcomes
Evidence relationships
Intervention and outcome relationships this study adds to the evidence network.
4
Evidence pairs
4
Relationships
3
Evidence topics
contributes_evidence
Editorial context
Why this study matters
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.
Moderate contributionModerate confidenceNetwork score: 68
3
Related topics
4
Evidence pairs
959
Related studies
High relevance in at least one topic
Why it is useful
- Contributes to 4 evidence relationships
- Includes primary outcome data
- Linked to 3 direct semantic evidence topics
Topic contributions
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Add related evidence to your Evidence Tracker
Save studies and evidence pages, organize your personal Evidence Tracker, and keep the research you care about in one place.
Primary evidence
Evidence topic
Glucose Variability
matched_outcome
Related evidence
Evidence topic
Glycemic Control
Save evidence
Core evidence
Study findings
The primary outcomes reported in this study.
Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)
Advanced Carbohydrate Counting (ACC) → Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)
Advanced Carbohydrate Counting (ACC) → Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)
Evidence Intelligence™
- EvidenceScore™
- Emerging
- Score 59 · Based on 1 study
- ImpactScore™
- 50
- Neutral
- ConsistencyScore™
- unclear
- Not enough independent studies
Supporting studies: Based on 1 study
Add to Evidence TrackerEvidence Intelligence™
- EvidenceScore™
- Moderate
- Score 69 · Based on 2 studies
- ImpactScore™
- 50
- Neutral
- ConsistencyScore™
- 35
- mixed
Supporting studies: Based on 2 studies
Add to Evidence TrackerMean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)
Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) → Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)
Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) → Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)
Evidence Intelligence™
- EvidenceScore™
- Moderate
- Score 69 · Based on 2 studies
- ImpactScore™
- 50
- Neutral
- ConsistencyScore™
- 35
- mixed
Supporting studies: Based on 2 studies
Add to Evidence TrackerEvidence Library
Build your evidence library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Evidence Suggest
- HbA1c decreased by 2 to 4 mmol/mol, but not statistically significant.
- MAGE showed a decrease of up to 0.3 mmol/L, also not statistically significant.
- Overall effectiveness of dietary interventions remains unclear.
Who this applies to
- Adults diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes
- Individuals seeking dietary management strategies for diabetes
Keep in Mind
- Results may not apply to all demographics of Type 1 diabetes patients.
- Further research is needed to identify effective dietary interventions.
- The study's findings indicate a need for more robust evidence in dietary management.
Between the Lines
- Unclear effectiveness of interventions on glycemic control
- Limited statistical significance in outcome measures
- Potential lack of generalizability to broader populations
Evidence Library
Build your evidence library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Connected Evidence
Explore related studies, evidence collections, and research questions.
Relationships organized using the Dediabetes Evidence Intelligence™ framework.
This study contributes to evidence on Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) and HbA1c, Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) and Glucose Variability.
Related evidence relationships
Explore in Evidence ExplorerThis study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.
Behavioral & Lifestyle
Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) → HbA1c
Behavioral & Lifestyle
Evidence Intelligence™
- EvidenceScore™
- Moderate
- Score 69 · Based on 2 studies
- ImpactScore™
- 50
- Neutral
- ConsistencyScore™
- 35
- mixed
Supporting studies: Based on 2 studies
View evidenceBehavioral & Lifestyle
Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) → Glucose Variability
Behavioral & Lifestyle
Evidence Intelligence™
- EvidenceScore™
- Moderate
- Score 69 · Based on 2 studies
- ImpactScore™
- 50
- Neutral
- ConsistencyScore™
- 35
- mixed
Supporting studies: Based on 2 studies
View evidenceIncluded in these evidence collections
Curated evidence collections and hubs this study is part of.
Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) Evidence Hub
All studies on Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC)
2 studies
intervention_hubContributes to Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) evidence base.
Glucose Variability Evidence Hub
All studies measuring Glucose Variability
2 studies
outcome_hubMeasures Glucose Variability as a key outcome.
HbA1c Evidence Hub
All studies measuring HbA1c
2 studies
outcome_hubMeasures HbA1c as a key outcome.
Recent Diabetes Research
Latest published studies
recency_collection
Published within the last 2 years.
Explore more in Evidence Explorer
Jump to pre-filtered views in Evidence Explorer.
All studies on Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) and HbA1c
Intervention: Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC)Outcome: HbA1c
2 results
All studies on Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) and Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)
Intervention: Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC)Outcome: Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)
2 results
All studies on Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC)
Intervention: Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC)
2 results
All studies measuring HbA1c
Outcome: HbA1c
2 results
All studies measuring Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)
Outcome: Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)
2 results
Questions answered by this study
Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.
Does Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) lower HbA1c?
Moderate Evidence
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) for HbA1c.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are mixed and should be interpreted cautiously.
Evidence caveat: The available evidence reports mixed findings.
Ranked evidence signals
- 1
HbA1c
EvidenceScore™ Moderate | EvidenceScore™ 69.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Mixed | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is cautious because the available studies report mixed findings.
Limitations
- Only one supporting study is available.
Does Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) improve mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)?
Moderate Evidence
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) for mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE).
ConsistencyScore™: Results are mixed and should be interpreted cautiously.
Evidence caveat: The available evidence reports mixed findings.
Ranked evidence signals
- 1
Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)
EvidenceScore™ Moderate | EvidenceScore™ 69.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Mixed | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is cautious because the available studies report mixed findings.
Limitations
- Only one supporting study is available.
Does Advanced Carbohydrate Counting (ACC) lower HbA1c?
Emerging Evidence
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Advanced Carbohydrate Counting (ACC) for HbA1c.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
- 1
HbA1c
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
- Only one supporting study is available.
Does Advanced Carbohydrate Counting (ACC) improve mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)?
Emerging Evidence
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Advanced Carbohydrate Counting (ACC) for mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE).
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
- 1
Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
- Only one supporting study is available.
Next steps
Continue your research
Choose a next path through related evidence topics, Evidence Explorer views, and research summaries.
Evidence topics
Follow the topics this study contributes to.
Explore in Evidence Explorer
Open broader Evidence Explorer views for this relationship.
All studies on Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) and HbA1cAll studies on Basic carbohydrate counting (BCC) and Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)All studies on Advanced Carbohydrate Counting (ACC) and HbA1cAll studies on Advanced Carbohydrate Counting (ACC) and Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)
Related research
Read related research summaries.
Carbohydrate Counting Improves Estimation Skills in Type 2 DiabetesHRS-7535 improves glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetesHigh-protein diet shows little effect on glycemic control in diabetesAdding medications improves blood sugar control in diabetes patients.Bariatric surgery improves glucose homeostasis in type 2 diabetes.
No ads. No tracking.
Focused on evidence, not advertising.
Secure & private
Your data is always protected.
Always up to date
New studies added every day.