Validation of Glycemic Index Values Represented as Bar Graphs in Scholarly Articles for Clinical Nutrition Application

Glycemic index (GI) has been a proven clinical nutrition tool. It has been utilized in chronic diseases such as PCOS, diabetes, obesity and metabolic syndrome. The GI value of a test food is the ratio of the glucose response over 2 hours against the reference food. The references food is usually either glucose or bread. GI values may often be directly available as values in texts, tables, or figures. The indirect values may be represented as values, images or both values and, concentration of glucose over time or GI values. Less ideally, some GI data are only presented in graphs. Data from these graphs without direct values could be extracted but this potentially contributes to less accurate results. Here, we investigate the extracted outcome from the original data and if their differences could affect the GI values. There are a few software’s and methods that may be used for data extraction; however, they are costly and complex. Also, different types of graphs require different extraction methods. Herein, we describe a simple reproducible method for extracting data from bar graphs using the freeware ImageJ. Seven extractors extracted 102 outcome values from 19 different scholarly articles. Differences between extractors were compared using the Overall Concordance Correlation Coefficients (OCCC), whereas differences between the original and extracted data were compared using the Lin’s Concordance Correlation Coefficients (CCC) and Bland-Altman. Both the OCCCs and CCCs were high for both outcome values and errors, while the CCCs were good and acceptable for the outcome. The Bland Altman showed good agreement between the extracted outcome and the true reported GI values. Therefore, the current method supports the extraction GI values from bar graphs in published scholarly articles even in their absence in text.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Health and Quality of Life
Published
2025-03-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.37934/hqol.1.1.115a
Primary Topic
Nutrition and Health in Aging
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Validation of Glycemic Index Values Represented as Bar Graphs in Scholarly Articles for Clinical Nutrition Application

Bhuwaneswaran Vijayam, Sakinah Muzarpar, Leeynesh Sooriyapiragasam, Ainun Amirah Abdul Rahim et al.
Journal of Health and Quality of Life
Nutrition and Health in Aging
article

Validation of Glycemic Index Values Represented as Bar Graphs in Scholarly Articles for Clinical Nutrition Application

Bhuwaneswaran Vijayam, Sakinah Muzarpar, Leeynesh Sooriyapiragasam, Ainun Amirah Abdul Rahim, Jia Yee Pwi, Jing Wen Wong, Siew Ping Lau
article en

Abstract

Glycemic index (GI) has been a proven clinical nutrition tool. It has been utilized in chronic diseases such as PCOS, diabetes, obesity and metabolic syndrome. The GI value of a test food is the ratio of the glucose response over 2 hours against the reference food. The references food is usually either glucose or bread. GI values may often be directly available as values in texts, tables, or figures. The indirect values may be represented as values, images or both values and, concentration of glucose over time or GI values. Less ideally, some GI data are only presented in graphs. Data from these graphs without direct values could be extracted but this potentially contributes to less accurate results. Here, we investigate the extracted outcome from the original data and if their differences could affect the GI values. There are a few software’s and methods that may be used for data extraction; however, they are costly and complex. Also, different types of graphs require different extraction methods. Herein, we describe a simple reproducible method for extracting data from bar graphs using the freeware ImageJ. Seven extractors extracted 102 outcome values from 19 different scholarly articles. Differences between extractors were compared using the Overall Concordance Correlation Coefficients (OCCC), whereas differences between the original and extracted data were compared using the Lin’s Concordance Correlation Coefficients (CCC) and Bland-Altman. Both the OCCCs and CCCs were high for both outcome values and errors, while the CCCs were good and acceptable for the outcome. The Bland Altman showed good agreement between the extracted outcome and the true reported GI values. Therefore, the current method supports the extraction GI values from bar graphs in published scholarly articles even in their absence in text.

Journal of Health and Quality of LifeVol. 1(1)
Newcastle University Medicine Malaysia (MY)
Openalex Percentile: Top 92%
Nutrition and Health in Aging
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.