Evidence mapPaperPMID 29422651Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2018

Impact of erroneous meal insulin bolus with dual-hormone artificial pancreas using a simplified bolus strategy - A randomized controlled trial.

Véronique Gingras, Mohamed Raef Smaoui, Charlotte Cameli, Virginie Messier, Martin Ladouceur, Laurent Legault, Rémi Rabasa-Lhoret

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Prospective Independent Evaluation of the Carbohydrate Counting Accuracy of Two Smartphone Applications.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Véronique GingrasInstitut de Recherches Cliniques de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4918-7534
Mohamed Raef SmaouiInstitut de Recherches Cliniques de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Charlotte CameliInstitut de Recherches Cliniques de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Virginie MessierInstitut de Recherches Cliniques de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Martin LadouceurResearch Center of the Université de Montréal Hospital Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Laurent LegaultMontreal Children's Hospital, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Rémi Rabasa-LhoretInstitut de Recherches Cliniques de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. remi.rabasa-lhoret@ircm.qc.ca.
Montreal Clinical Research Institute · CAMontreal Children's Hospital · CAUniversité de Montréal · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Postprandial glucose control remains challenging for patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D). A simplified meal bolus approach with a dual-hormone (insulin and glucagon) closed-loop system (DH-CLS) has been tested; yet, the impact of categorization errors with this strategy is unknown. The objective was to compare, in a randomized controlled inpatient trial, DH-CLS with the simplified meal bolus approach for two different meals properly categorized or overestimated. We tested, in patients with T1D, the simplified strategy with two standardized breakfasts (n = 10 per meal) adequately categorized or overestimated: (1) 75 g and (2) 45 g of carbohydrate. No difference was observed for percentage of time <4.0 mmol/L over a 4-hour post-meal period (primary outcome; median [IQR]: 0[0-0] vs. 0[0-0] for both comparisons, p = 0.47 and 0.31 for the 75 g and 45 g meals, respectively). Despite higher meal insulin boluses with overestimation for both meals (9.2 [8.2-9.6] vs. 8.1 [7.3-9.1] U and 8.4 [7.2-10.4] vs. 4.8 [3.7-5.6] U; p < 0.05), mean glycemia, percentage of time in target range and glucagon infusion did not differ. Additional scenarios were tested in silico with comparable results. These results suggest that the DH-CLS with a simplified meal bolus calculation is probably able to avoid hypoglycemia in the event of meal size misclassification.

Indexed as

Pancreas, ArtificialAdultDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1FemaleGlucagonHumansHypoglycemiaHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinInsulin Infusion SystemsMaleMiddle AgedPostprandial PeriodGlucagonHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin

Identifiers

PMID29422651
PMCPMC5805693
OpenAlexW2793749788

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.