To The Editor,
There was an error in our published article titled “Analysis of dietary behavior and intake related to glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes aged 30 years or older in Korea: Utilizing the 8th Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2019–2021)” Nutrition Research and Practice 2024 Feb; 18(2): 239-256. https://doi.org/10.4162/nrp.2024.18.2.239; pISSN 1976-1457 eISSN 2005-6168.
We found that the crosstab sums in Tables 1-3 were recorded incorrectly. We also want to revise the results and discussion as shown below. These errors did not influence the subsequent analyses/statistics at all. Thus, changes for these errors do not impact the conclusions of the paper.
After correction
1. On page 243, Table 1:
2. On page 244, Paragraph 1:
… were women, with 57.9% and 42.1% having good glycemic control, respectively. Regarding age, 4.4% of the participants were in their 30s, 12.6% in their 40s, 24.4% in their 50s, and 26.6% in their 60s, and those who were in their 70s and older accounted for the highest percentage at 32.0%. The age group with the highest rate of good glycemic control was in their 70s at 37.2%, and the lowest rate was in their 30s at 5.7%.
3. On page 245, Table 2:
4. On page 246, Table 3:
5. On page 250, Paragraph 3:
Regarding the general characteristics of the participants, the 70s age group had the highest rate of patients with diabetes (32.0%). The 70s age group had the highest rate of participants with good glycemic control (37.2%), and there was significant difference among the groups (P = 0.036). Previous studies have reported that the probability of poor glycemic control decreases as age increases [16].
6. On page 250, Paragraph 6:
In the lunch and dinner intake frequency variable that demonstrated significant results (P = 0.048, P = 0.044 respectively), the rate of good glycemic control was 86.6% and 95.2% among participants who consumed lunch and dinner more than 5 times a week, whereas the rate of good glycemic control was 5.4% and 2.3% among those who consumed lunch and dinner 3–4 times a week. Park et al. [19], who studied the frequency of meal intake, reported that men who consumed 2 meals a day were more likely to develop metabolic syndrome than men who consumed 3 meals a day. Furthermore, women who eat 2 meals a day and skip breakfast were more likely to have elevated fasting blood sugar and triglyceride levels. In addition, among participants who rarely consumed dinner 1–2 times a week, 2.5% had good glycemic control, which is consistent with the results of a study in which fasting blood sugar levels decreased in women who skipped dinner [20].
7. On page 251, Paragraph 3:
According to the survey results, only 6.4% received nutritional education within the past year, and the proportion of those in the group with good glycemic control was only 6.0%. In this study, the nutritional education experience of the KNHANES VIII was lower than the results of the KNHANES V study [23], where 8.4% had nutritional education within 1 year and 20.3% had diabetes management education experience. These results are still insufficient compared to reports recommending that education and support are needed at 4 key points for diabetes self-management: at diagnosis, every year or when treatment goals are not achieved, when complications occur, and during life transitions [24]. A study by Lee et al. [25] also explored the awareness, utilization, and effect of nutrition labels on food selection in participants with diabetes, and the results were 48.8%, 11.4%, and 9.6%, respectively, and the utilization of nutrition labels among participants with diabetes in Korea was only < 50%. According to these results, people who have not received diet therapy education have low nutrition label utilization, and that utilizing nutrition labels as a means to show interest in health and practice proper eating habits will be helpful in managing a healthy diet for patients with diabetes [25]. In this study, the rate of good glycemic control among participants who were aware of nutrition labels (60.0%) was not significantly different from the rate of good glycemic control (40.0%) among those who were unaware of nutrition labels. Furthermore, the rate of good glycemic control among participants who received nutritional education (6.0%) was not significantly different from the rate of good glycemic control (94.0%) among those who did not receive education.