English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background  Accurate and reliable monitoring of blood ketone and glucose levels is useful for athletes adhering to a ketogenic diet who want to verify that they are in a state of ketosis and, therefore, accruing performance adaptations. However, the cost of devices and testing materials may prohibit their use. More affordable field testing systems are available, but their accuracy and reliability remain in question. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the agreement between a previously validated ketone and glucose meter (Meter 1 – Precision Xtra) and a more affordable meter that has not been validated (Meter 2 – Keto-Mojo), and also to assess the diagnostic performance of Meter 2 for identifying nutritional ketosis.    Methods  Thirteen participants (7 females and 6 males; 21.6 ± 3.0 years old) visited the laboratory three times in this randomized, double-blind cross-over design study. Ketone and glucose levels were measured with Meter 1 and Meter 2 twice before and twice after ingestion of a racemic ketone, natural ketone, or maltodextrin supplement. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) estimates and their 95% confidence intervals were calculated to evaluate interrater reliability for Meter 1 and Meter 2. Bland-Altman plots were constructed to visually assess the agreement between devices. Area under the ROC curve analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic ability of Meter 2 to detect nutritional ketosis at a threshold ketone level of 0.5 mM as identified by Meter 1.    Results  Reliability between the meters was excellent for measuring ketones (ICC = .968; .942–.981) and good for measuring glucose (ICC = .809; .642–.893), though the Bland-Altman plot revealed substantial differences in agreement for measuring glucose. Area under the ROC curve (Area = 0.913; 0.828–0.998) was excellent for diagnosing nutritional ketosis.    Conclusions  Both Meter 1 and Meter 2 displayed excellent agreement between each other for ketone measurement. Meter 2 also displayed an excellent level of accuracy for diagnosing nutritional ketosis at a threshold value of 0.5 mM, making it an effective and affordable alternative to more expensive testing devices.

Reliability and diagnostic performance of a new blood ketone and glucose meter in humans