Evidence mapPaperPMID 36949671Full record

Trial reportJournal of diabetes science and technology2024

Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop in Adult Population With Type 1 Diabetes: A Substudy From the ADAPT Randomized Controlled Trial in Users of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring.

Tim van den Heuvel, Ralf Kolassa, Winfried Keuthage, Jens Kroeger, Roseline Ré, Simona de Portu, Linda Vorrink, John Shin, Javier Castañeda, Robert Vigersky and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Managing obesity in adults with type 1 diabetes.Diabetes research and clinical practice · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Tim van den HeuvelMedtronic International Trading Sàrl, Tolochenaz, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3907-6876
Ralf KolassaDiabetologische Schwerpunktpraxis, Bergheim, Germany.
Winfried KeuthageMedical Center am Clemenshospital, Münster, Germany.
Jens KroegerZentrum für Diabetologie Bergedorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Roseline RéMedtronic International Trading Sàrl, Tolochenaz, Switzerland.
Simona de PortuMedtronic International Trading Sàrl, Tolochenaz, Switzerland.
Linda VorrinkMedtronic International Trading Sàrl, Tolochenaz, Switzerland.
John ShinMedtronic, Northridge, CA, USA.
Javier CastañedaMedtronic International Trading Sàrl, Tolochenaz, Switzerland.
Robert VigerskyMedtronic, Northridge, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3546-3385
Ohad CohenMedtronic International Trading Sàrl, Tolochenaz, Switzerland.
Medtronic (Switzerland) · CHMedtronic (United States) · USClemenshospital Münster · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis analysis reports the findings from a predefined exploratory cohort (cohort B) from the ADAPT (ADvanced Hybrid Closed Loop Study in Adult Population with Type 1 Diabetes) study. Adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) with suboptimal glucose control were randomly allocated to an advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system or multiple daily injections of insulin (MDI) plus real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM).

methodsIn this prospective, multicenter, exploratory, open-label, randomized controlled trial, 13 participants using MDI + RT-CGM and with HbA1c ≥8.0% were randomized to switch to AHCL (n = 8) or continue with MDI + RT-CGM (n = 5) for six months. Prespecified endpoints included the between-group difference in mean change from baseline in HbA1c, CGM-derived measures of glycemic control, and safety.

resultsThe mean HbA1c level decreased by 1.70 percentage points in the AHCL group versus a 0.60 percentage point decrease in the MDI + RT-CGM group, with a model-based treatment effect of -1.08 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.17 to 0.00 percentage points;

conclusionsIn people with T1D with HbA1c ≥8.0%, the use of AHCL resulted in improved glycemic control relative to MDI + RT-CGM. The scale of improvement suggests that AHCL should be considered as an option for people not achieving good glycemic control on MDI + RT-CGM.

Indexed as

Blood GlucoseBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Glycated HemoglobinHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinInsulin Infusion SystemsAdultContinuous Glucose MonitoringFemaleGlycemic ControlHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesBlood GlucoseGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinautomated insulin deliveryclosed-loop systemdiabetesHbA1chyperglycemiahypoglycemiatime in range

Identifiers

PMID36949671
PMCPMC11418449
OpenAlexW4360600319

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.