Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Systematic review shows targeted nutrition and exercise minimize glycemic excursions in healthy adults, highlighting continuous glucose monitoring for personalized lifestyle modifications.
Background Blood glucose management has progressed from diabetes treatment to tracking trends in healthy populations since the introduction of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in 1999. Previously, this population was difficult to study using traditional self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG). This study aims to identify global research trends and synthesize existing findings regarding the impact of dietary and lifestyle factors on glycemic variability in healthy individuals. Methods A Bibliometric-systematic literature review (B-SLR) was conducted by analyzing articles from the Web of Science database published between 1999 and 2025. Following a systematic screening process, 48 articles were selected for qualitative synthesis and categorized based on intervention types. The quality of the included studies was evaluated to ensure methodological rigor. Results The synthesis of 48 included studies revealed distinct behavioral clusters. Dietary interventions focusing on nutritional timing and composition (e.g., preloads and meal scheduling) consistently suppressed postprandial glucose spikes. Concurrently, physical activity interventions, particularly timed postprandial exercises, effectively minimized glycemic excursions. These fragmented lifestyle factors were successfully integrated into a comprehensive four-quadrant typology (Types I–IV) evaluated by intervention rigor and data continuity. Conclusions The proposed novel four-quadrant typology successfully bridges fragmented lifestyle factors, revealing critical longitudinal gaps and providing an original, standardized framework to guide future research toward personalized behavioral interventions, technology-driven lifestyle modifications, and health optimization in healthy populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kaneda et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: