Evidence mapPaperPMID 36183170Full record

ReviewPediatric diabetes2022

Adolescent ambivalence about diabetes technology-The Janus faces of automated care.

Fergus J Cameron, Michael Arnold, John W Gregory

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pediatric diabetes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

3 authors.

Fergus J CameronDepartment of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, The Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1566-7436
Michael ArnoldSchool of Historical and Philosophical Studies, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
John W GregoryDivision of Population Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Janus face metaphor approach highlights that a technology may simultaneously have two opposite faces or properties with unforeseen paradoxes within human-technology interaction. Suboptimal acceptance and clinical outcomes are sometimes seen in adolescents who use diabetes-related technologies. A traditional linear techno-determinist model of technology use would ascribe these unintended outcomes to suboptimal technology, suboptimal patient behavior, or suboptimal outcome measures. This paradigm has demonstratively not been successful at universally improving clinical outcomes over the last two decades. Alternatively, the Janus face metaphor moves away from a linear techno-determinist model and focuses on the dynamic interaction of the human condition and technology. Specifically, it can be used to understand variance in adoption or successful use of diabetes-related technology and to retrospectively understand suboptimal outcomes. The Janus face metaphor also allows for a prospective exploration of potential impacts of diabetes-related technology by patients, families, and their doctors so as to anticipate and minimize potential subsequent tensions.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusAdolescentHumansProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesTechnologyadolescentsdiabetestechnologyuptake

Identifiers

PMID36183170
PMCPMC10091736

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.