Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked★ key study I-WHT-125 in-depth review

Low-carbohydrate diets slightly reduced acid reflux in trials

The Efficacy of Dietary Interventions in Patients with Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Intervention Studies.

Overview

Lakananurak N et al.. Nutrients 2024 · PMID 38337748 · DOI 10.3390/nu16030464

Across three studies, low-carbohydrate diets reduced the time the oesophagus was exposed to acid by about 3 percentage points.

Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

Summarise diet treatments for GERD.

How was the study done?

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

21 studies.

What was actually found?

Low-carbohydrate diets helped modestly.

How large was the observed effect?

MD -2.8% acid exposure time.

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Diet can help a little; it is not a cure.

What are the study's limitations?

Few small studies.

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Partly supports diet change; not the claimed cure.

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

High.

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Cannot show that stopping white flour replaces medicines.

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Lakananurak N et al.
Journal
Nutrients
Year
2024
Identifier
PMID 38337748 DOI 10.3390/nu16030464 · PMC10857327
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26; Crossref works API 2026-10-26
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
abstract only
Conflicts of interest and funding

No conflicts declared.

2. Research question

How effective are dietary interventions in GERD?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Meta-analysis – Systematic review and meta-analysis of intervention studies in GERD
Population

Patients with GERD in intervention studies

Country

International

Period

Searches to June 2023

Sample size

21 studies, 16 types of intervention (3 low-carbohydrate)

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Intervention studies in GERD patients

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

Dietary interventions (low-carbohydrate, high-fat, eating speed, low-FODMAP, other)

Comparator

Control diets

Endpoints

Oesophageal acid exposure time; reflux events; symptoms

Statistical methods

Meta-analysis where possible

5. Actual results

Results

Low-carbohydrate diets reduced oesophageal acid exposure time (MD -2.834%, 95% CI -4.554 to -1.114); slow eating did not reduce reflux events (RR 1.044, 0.543-2.004); most other interventions positive only in single studies.

Absolute risks

not reported

Authors' conclusion

Low-carbohydrate diets improved GERD outcomes; the overall evidence on dietary interventions remains scarce; long-term RCTs are needed.

6. Strengths

  • Recent systematic search

7. Weaknesses

  • Only 3 low-carbohydrate studies
  • Short interventions
  • Not specific to white flour

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
AMSTAR 2
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
some concerns
Rationale

Few small studies; quality grading not described in abstract.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

MD CI symmetric (stats/C-WHT-08); effect of about 3 percentage points in acid exposure time.

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Partial support: reducing carbohydrate lowers acid exposure modestly; does not test white-flour elimination or medicine withdrawal.

11. Independent contrary findings

I-WHT-119 (GI irrelevant to heartburn).

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

High.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Supports a modest diet effect only.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biassome concerns
Precision of resultslow
Directnessindirect
Reproducibilitypartly replicated
Consistency with the overall evidenceconsistent
Regional transferabilityhigh
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

Long-term trials, white-flour-specific trials.

15. Linked fact checks