Narrative reviewindependent cross-checkabstract only checked I-INTA-17 standard review
Is all rice the same for blood sugar?
The Glycemic Index of Rice and Rice Products: A Review, and Table of GI Values.
Overview
Kaur B et al.. Critical reviews in food science and nutrition 2016 · PMID 25590950 · DOI 10.1080/10408398.2012.717976
No: the effect of rice on blood sugar depends on the variety, how it is processed and what it is eaten with.
Does the study support the specific claim? Unclear · Methodological quality: moderate
Plain-language summary
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Glycaemic index of rice
- How was the study done?
Narrative review
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
Published GI studies
- What was actually found?
GI depends on variety and processing
- How large was the observed effect?
Not given in abstract
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Portion and type matter
- What are the study's limitations?
Abstract only
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
No support for a basmati ban
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Specific comparisons with Egyptian rice
Scientific in-depth review
1. Full reference
- Authors
- Kaur B et al.
- Journal
- Critical reviews in food science and nutrition
- Year
- 2016
- Identifier
- PMID 25590950 DOI 10.1080/10408398.2012.717976
- Verification
- verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-25
- Retracted
- no
- Corrections
- none
- Extent checked
- abstract only
- Conflicts of interest and funding
not stated in abstract
2. Research question
GI of rice and rice products and factors affecting it
3. Study design and population
- Study design
- Narrative review – Narrative review with table of GI values
- Population
Not applicable
- Country
Not applicable
- Period
Not stated
- Sample size
Not applicable
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Published GI studies of rice
4. Methods and endpoints
- Exposure / intervention
Rice variety, composition, processing, accompaniments
- Comparator
Not applicable
- Endpoints
GI
- Statistical methods
Not applicable
5. Actual results
- Results
Rice is generally considered high GI, but GI depends on varietal, compositional, processing and accompaniment factors; review provides a table of published values.
- Absolute risks
Not applicable
- Authors' conclusion
Ways to reduce the glycaemic impact of rice are needed given high rice intake and insulin resistance.
6. Strengths
- Comprehensive table of values
7. Weaknesses
- Narrative
- Abstract gives no specific values
8. Risk of bias
- Orienting tool
- none applicable
- Type of assessment
- simplified assessment (abstract only)
- Full formal assessment
- no
- Overall risk of bias
- not assessable
- Rationale
Narrative review.
9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation
Not applicable.
10. Relevance to the specific claim
Variety and processing determine GI; label 'basmati' vs 'Egyptian' is not decisive.
11. Independent contrary findings
None.
12. Transferability to Germany and Europe
High.
13. Overall methodological judgement
Useful background.
| Multidimensional assessment | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | moderate |
| Risk of bias | not assessable |
| Precision of results | not applicable |
| Directness | indirect |
| Reproducibility | replicated |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | mixed |
| Regional transferability | high |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | not applicable |
14. Open questions
None.
15. Linked fact checks
- Basmati rice is 'wrong' (in another video: 'not good ... rubbish'); ordinary Egyptian white rice is the rice to eat. – Studies with mixed or unclear results