Background/Objectives: Translating medical nutrition therapy guidance into practical meal plans requires consistent application of clinical and dietetic rules while accommodating different therapeutic regimens. This study developed and computationally evaluated a transparent Python-based decision-support prototype for diabetic menu planning. Methods: The prototype combines procedural decision rules, food-exchange patterns, nutritional checks, and mixed-integer linear programming (MILP). Two meal-frequency pathways were represented: a conventional multi-meal pathway and a three-main-meal pathway for people treated with modern basal–bolus insulin regimens. For the multi-meal pathway, a structured dataset containing 42 candidate meals (seven alternatives in each of six meal categories) was used for objective-specific optimization and exhaustive evaluation of all 117,649 possible daily combinations under predefined nutritional constraints. Sensitivity to the allowable energy deviation and trade-offs among nutritional objectives were also examined. Results: The prototype produced deterministic pathway selection, exchange allocation, nutritional summaries, and explicit warnings when required information was unavailable. Under the baseline ±6.5% energy tolerance, 5628 of 117,649 six-meal combinations (4.78%) satisfied all nutritional constraints. Objective-specific optimization identified feasible solutions for minimizing energy, carbohydrate, and saturated fat and maximizing dietary fiber. The proportion of feasible combinations ranged from 2.71% at ±5% energy tolerance to 9.47% at ±10%, while comparison of objective-specific solutions demonstrated measurable nutritional trade-offs. The three-meal basal–bolus pathway generated predefined exchange allocation and clinical-review warnings but was not subjected to the same exhaustive combinatorial optimization. Conclusions: The prototype demonstrates the computational feasibility of integrating explicit dietetic rules, regimen-related meal-pattern selection, food-exchange allocation, and mathematical optimization within an inspectable decision-support framework. The findings establish technical feasibility within the evaluated datasets rather than clinical effectiveness. Independent software testing, expert usability assessment, evaluation using larger and version-controlled meal datasets, and prospective clinical validation are required before routine clinical implementation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marić et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: