ReviewDiabetology & metabolic syndrome2023
Glucose control and psychosocial outcomes with use of automated insulin delivery for 12 to 96 weeks in type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Review in Diabetology & metabolic syndrome, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Diabetes technology (Update 2026)].Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2026Guideline
- The effect of automated insulin delivery system use on diabetes distress in people with type 1 diabetes and their caregivers: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2025Pooled it
- Recommendations for recognizing, risk stratifying, treating, and managing children and adolescents with hypoglycemia.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Pooled it
- Psychosocial outcomes among adults with type 1 diabetes using a tubeless automated insulin delivery system compared with sensor augmented pump therapy: A randomised, parallel-group clinical trial sub-study.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Trial
- Fully Closed-Loop Improves Glycemic Control Compared with Pump with CGM in Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes and HbA1c Above Target: A Two-Center, Randomized Crossover Study.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2025Trial
- A bibliometric analysis of global trends in AI-driven digital health technologies for diabetes management.Medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Long-term effectiveness of automated insulin delivery in young people with type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2026Article
- Glycemic Outcomes and Device Engagement Over 18 Months Following Initiation of Two Different Automated Insulin Delivery Systems in American Youth With Type 1 Diabetes.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2026Article
- Rethinking control-IQ+ technology: Simple strategies for easy optimization.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Review
- A machine learning approach to predicting severe diabetes distress in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus.Journal of diabetes investigation · 2026Article
- Comparison of AID users and non-users regarding glycemic control and diabetes distress: A mixed-methods study.PloS one · 2026Article
- SmartAdjust technology and beyond: a new era in diabetes management - a correspondence.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Assessment of the added value of a tubeless pump: A time trade-off (TTO) study for utility elicitation of insulin delivery systems in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D).Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2025Article
- Article
- Hybrid Closed-Loop Therapy in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes in England: Long-Term Outcomes from a Real-World Observational Study.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2025Observational
- Long-term health economic evaluation of automated insulin delivery system compared with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion pumps and CGM in a real-world setting in Finnish paediatric and adult individuals with type 1 diabetes.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Article
- Practical Considerations and Implementation of Automated Insulin Delivery Systems.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2025Review
- Practical Considerations and Implementation of Automated Insulin Delivery Systems.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2025Review
- Efficacy and Safety of Automated Insulin Delivery Systems in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (Diabetes Metab J 2025;49:235-51).Diabetes & metabolism journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 13 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGlycaemic control of Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (T1DM) remains a challenge due to hypoglycaemic episodes and the burden of insulin self-management. Advancements have been made with the development of automated insulin delivery (AID) devices, yet, previous reviews have only assessed the use of AID over days or weeks, and potential benefits with longer time of AID use in this population remain unclear.
methodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing AID (hybrid and fully closed-loop systems) to usual care (sensor augmented pumps, multiple daily insulin injections, continuous glucose monitoring and predictive low-glucose suspend) for adults and children with T1DM with a minimum duration of 3 months. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, and Clinicaltrials.gov for studies published up until April 4, 2023. Main outcomes included time in range 70-180 mg/dL as the primary outcome, and change in HbA1c (%, mmol/mol), glucose variability, and psychosocial impact (diabetes distress, treatment satisfaction and fear of hypoglycaemia) as secondary outcomes. Adverse events included diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and severe hypoglycaemia. Statistical analyses were conducted using mean differences and odds ratios. Sensitivity analyses were performed according to age, study duration and type of AID device. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO, CRD42022366710.
resultsWe identified 25 comparisons from 22 studies (six crossover and 16 parallel designs) including a total of 2376 participants (721 in adult studies, 621 in paediatric studies, and 1034 in combined studies) which were eligible for analysis. Use of AID devices ranged from 12 to 96 weeks. Patients using AID had 10.87% higher time in range [95% CI 9.38 to 12.37; p < 0.0001, I
conclusionThe use of AID systems over 12 weeks, regardless of technical or clinical differences, improved glycaemic outcomes and diabetes distress without increasing the risk of adverse events in adults and children with T1DM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.