Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33332410›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Survey about do-it-yourself closed loop systems in the treatment of diabetes in Germany.

Anna Laura Herzog, Jonas Busch, Christoph Wanner, Holger K von Jouanne-Diedrich

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anna Laura HerzogDivision of Nephrology, Transplantationszentrum, University of Würzburg, Universitätsklinikum, Würzburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1767-8964
Jonas BuschTH Aschaffenburg (University of Applied Sciences), Aschaffenburg, Germany.
Christoph WannerDivision of Nephrology, Medizinische Klinik I, University of Würzburg, Universitätsklinikum, Würzburg, Germany.
Holger K von Jouanne-DiedrichCompetence Center for Artificial Intelligence, Faculty of Engineering, TH Aschaffenburg (University of Applied Sciences), Aschaffenburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5787-7351
Aschaffenburg University of Applied Sciences · DEUniversity of Würzburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) improves treatment with lower blood glucose levels and less patient effort. In combination with continuous insulin application, glycemic control improves and hypoglycemic episodes should decrease. Direct feedback of CGM to continuous subcutaneous insulin application, using an algorithm is called a closed-loop (CL) artificial pancreas system. Commercial devices stop insulin application by predicting hypoglycemic blood glucose levels through direct interaction between the sensor and pump. The prediction is usually made for about 30 minutes and insulin delivery is restarted at the previous level if a rise in blood glucose is predicted within the next 30 minutes (hybrid closed loop system, HCL this is known as a predictive low glucose suspend system (PLGS)). In a fully CL system, sensor and pump communicate permanently with each other. Hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems, which require the user to estimate the meal size and provide a meal insulin basis, are commercially available in Germany at the moment. These systems result in fewer hyperglycemic and hypoglycemic episodes with improved glucose control. Open source initiatives have provided support by building do-it-yourself CL (DIYCL) devices for automated insulin application since 2014, and are used by a tech-savvy subgroup of patients. The first commercial hybrid CL system has been available in Germany since September 2019. We surveyed 1054 patients to determine which devices are currently used, which features would be in demand by potential users, and the benefits of DIYCL systems. 9.7% of these used a DIYCL system, while 50% would most likely trust these systems but more than 85% of the patients would use a commercial closed loop system, if available. The DIYCL users had a better glucose control regarding their time in range (TIR) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c).

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedBlood GlucoseBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringChildChild, PreschoolDiabetes MellitusFemaleGermanyGlycated HemoglobinHumansHypoglycemic AgentsInfantInfant, NewbornInsulinBlood GlucoseGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin

Identifiers

PMID33332410
PMCPMC7746287
OpenAlexW3111552161

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.