ArticleEndocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists2025
Moving the Goalposts: Do Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Want Time in Tight Range?
Article in Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesOur objective was to understand attitudes toward time in tight range (TITR: 70-140 mg/dL) among adults with type 1 diabetes. The perspectives of people with type 1 diabetes on TITR can inform educational approaches to introducing potential new continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics in a way that optimizes glycemic and quality of life outcomes for people with type 1 diabetes.
methodsFocus groups with adult CGM users with type 1 diabetes elicited feedback on a potential shift to TITR. Groups were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using content analysis.
resultsParticipants were 33 adults (age 42.7 ± 16.7 years, 55% female, 91% non-Hispanic White, 23 ± 16 years living with diabetes, HbA1c 6.5 ± 0.6% (48 ± 6 mmol/mol)). Most (88%) used automated insulin delivery. Some approved of TITR for the potential to improve their long-term health. Concerns about TITR included increased management burden; risk of anxiety, hypoglycemia, disordered eating; and feelings of failure. Participants advocated for flexible, personalized clinical targets and better technologies, insulins, and access, to make TITR achievable for more people with type 1 diabetes.
conclusionsResults indicate that TITR may be a welcome shift for some who are already using the tighter metric but may add risks and psychosocial and self-management burden even in a group of adults predominantly using automated insulin delivery and achieving current HbA1c goals. Including the perspectives of people with type 1 diabetes in decision-making around CGM metrics will be important for the implementation of new clinical targets to improve patient care.
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.