ArticleCureus2023
Adoption of Wearable Insulin Biosensors for Diabetes Management: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evolution of Biosensors and Current State-of-the-Art Applications in Diabetes Control.Biosensors · 2026Review
- Metabolomics uncovers the diabetes metabolic network: from pathophysiological mechanisms to clinical applications.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Review
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 11 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWearable insulin biosensors represent a novel approach that combines the benefits of real-time glucose monitoring and automated insulin delivery, potentially revolutionizing how individuals with diabetes manage their condition. STUDY PURPOSE: To analyze the behavioral intentions of wearable insulin biosensors among diabetes patients, the factors that drive or hinder their usage, and the implications for diabetes management and healthcare outcomes.
methodsA cross-sectional survey design was adopted in this study. The validated questionnaire included 10 factors (Performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, behavioral intention, trust, perceived privacy risk, and personal innovativeness) affecting the acceptance of wearable insulin sensors. A total of 248 diabetic patients who had used wearable sensors participated in the study.
resultsPerformance expectancy was rated the highest (Mean = 3.84 out of 5), followed by effort expectancy (Mean = 3.78 out of 5), and trust (Mean = 3.53 out of 5). Statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) were observed with respect to socio-demographic variables including age and gender on various influencing factors and adoption intentions. PE, EE, and trust were positively associated with adoption intentions.
conclusionWhile wearable insulin sensors are positively perceived with respect to diabetes management, issues like privacy and security may affect their adoption.
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.