ArticleJournal of health equity2025
Race and ethnic disparities in insulin pump and continuous glucose monitor use between 2017 and 2024: a systematic review with a focus on health equity.
Article in Journal of health equity, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Applications of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Cognitive Research in Diabetes: a Scoping Review.Current diabetes reports · 2026Article
- US race/ethnic disparities in diabetes technologies: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 950 000 individuals.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2026Review
- Real-time continuous glucose monitoring vs self-monitoring of blood glucose in distinct multi-ethnic cohorts of patients living with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes in the United States: A cost-utility analysis from a Medicare perspective.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2025Article
- Automating Insulin Dosing and Delivery: The Latest in Algorithms, Calculators, and Devices.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Diabetes mellitus (DM) technology (i.e., continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) and insulin pumps) can improve clinical outcomes and use is on the rise. However, some studies highlight disparities in DM technology prescription rates across various race/ethnicity groups. Specifically, recent studies note baseline DM technology use was significantly lower for Black patients compared to their non-Black counterparts. This systematic review examined the available evidence on the association of prescription rates for DM technology (CGM and insulin pumps) use by race/ethnicity. Adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis- Equity guidelines (PRISMA-Equity), a literature search of observational studies published between 2017-2024 was conducted using Medline, Cochrane, PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase databases. Articles were included if they reported data on DM technology use by race/ethnicity. All studies reported significant differences in DM technology use by race/ethnicity; with White non-Hispanic (WNH) patients having the highest prescription rates (average 56.3% (range 12-79%)), followed by patients that identify as Hispanic (average 28.8% (range 4-76%)), and Black (average 21.3% (range 3-52%)). Secondary analyses examining the influence of glycemic control, patient experience, and social determinants of health (SDoH) on the relationship between race/ethnicity and DM technology use were conducted. Limitations of included studies are discussed including 1) inaccurate measurements of race and ethnicity that failed to identify the contextual detail of ethnicity and 2) limited measurements of health outcomes and SDoH. Further research is needed to more accurately examine the social and environmental factors that influence the identified race/ethnicity disparities and to develop strategies that ensure equitable access to beneficial DM technology.
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.