Trial reportJournal of diabetes research2025
Pilot Study of Early Adoption of Automated Insulin Delivery in Underresourced Youth.
Trial report in Journal of diabetes research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Disparities in outcomes and technology use in children with Type 1 diabetes (T1D) from underresourced backgrounds are well documented. The feasibility of initiating automated insulin delivery (AID) soon after diagnosis of T1D is less certain in this population. This pilot study assessed the feasibility and acceptability of providing access to the Tandem Control-IQ AID system to children with public insurance soon after T1D diagnosis. Methods: Publicly insured children aged 6-21 years of age within 3 months of T1D diagnosis were eligible for the study. Participants were randomized 2:1 to AID or usual care for 6 months. Continuous glucose monitoring data were collected at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. Caregivers and youth completed closing surveys and participated in focus group interviews to assess safety and user experience. Results: Nineteen youth were enrolled, with thirteen in the intervention and six in the control group. The mean age was 11.5 ± 2.3 years, 47% were female, and 89% were from underrepresented racial or ethnic groups. A larger proportion of the AID group compared to the control group achieved the American Diabetes Association benchmark of > 70% time in range (50% vs. 0% of participants at 3 months; 37% vs. 0% of participants at 6 months; not statistically significant). All caregivers and 69% of youth in the AID group reported satisfaction, and 85% of youth continued using AID 6 months after the completion of the study. Focus groups showed favorable experiences with AID use. Conclusion: Early initiation of AID is feasible and acceptable in youth with recently diagnosed T1D from underresourced populations who historically experience lower technology adoption and less optimal glycemic outcomes. Diabetes clinicians should consider providing tailored support and dedicated resources to families early in diagnosis with T1D to promote AID initiation and continued use.
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.