ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025
One-year evaluation of automated insulin delivery systems in adults with type 1 diabetes.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of real-world evidence on commercially available automated insulin delivery systems in people with type 1 diabetes.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Pooled it
- Safety and glycemic outcomes of DBLG1 coupled to the DANA-i pump in adults and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus. The SP8 trial.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2026Article
- Bridging the digital divide: student-led literacy initiatives in diabetes management.Frontiers in clinical diabetes and healthcare · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study evaluates the effectiveness of four commercially available automated insulin delivery (AID) systems in routine clinical practice for type 1 diabetes management and compares their first-year outcomes. Materials: This retrospective study (October 2020-October 2023) included glucometric data from type 1 diabetes patients collected from the Asturias Automatic Insulin Devices Registry. People with type 1 diabetes using four different AID systems [Minimed™780G (MM780G), Accu-Chek® Insight-Diabeloop (DBLG), Tandem-Control-IQ, and Ypsopump Cambridge HCL-app (Cam-APS)] were included in the study. Primary outcomes were glycaemic control after one year. Secondary outcomes compared the results between the four systems. Results: 174 patients (60: MM780G, 45: DBLG, 30: Control-IQ, 39: Cam-APS), aged 18-73, predominantly women, were enrolled. At baseline, glycemic control, measured by the achievement of the international consensus targets [TBR (Time Below Range) <4%; TIR(Time in Range) >70% and TAR (Time Above Range) <25%] was only met by 9.72% of participants, while after 1 year of an AID system use, it improved to more than 52%. When comparing between systems, TIR improved significantly after 1 year in all systems. However, Control-IQ did not show improvement in mean glucose and Glucose management index (GMI) and only users of DBLG showed improvement in coefficient of variation (CV). MM780G users achieved the best results after 12 months in mean glucose, TIR and GMI. However, their baseline situation was also better than that of the other groups. Discussion: This study confirms that, after 12 months of routine clinical use, the use of commercially available automated insulin delivery (AID) systems significantly improves glycemic control in individuals with type 1 diabetes. However, the degree of improvement varies depending on the specific system used.These findings underscore the importance of selecting and optimizing AID systems individually to maximize clinical benefits in type 1 diabetes management.
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.