ArticleDiabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association2026
Automated insulin delivery system use and physical activity levels in adults with type 1 diabetes: A BETTER registry analysis.
Article in Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association, 2026. 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.
- Automated insulin delivery system use and physical activity levels in adults with type 1 diabetes: A BETTER registry analysis.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026Article
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
aimsTo explore the association between using automated insulin delivery (AID) systems and physical activity (PA) levels among people with type 1 diabetes.
methodsCross-sectional study including 1156 participants from the BETTER Type 1 Diabetes registry. INCLUSION CRITERIA: type 1 diabetes; aged ≥18 years old; reported PA with a validated questionnaire. PA is defined as activities lasting at least 10 consecutive minutes. Regression models (with and without adjustment for imbalanced variables) were used to compare PA levels among treatment options, with pairwise comparisons between the AID group and each group (i.e. Pump + continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), Injections + CGM, and non-CGM group).
resultsIn the AID group, 87% of participants reported performing PA during the past 7 days (primary outcome), compared to 79% in the Pump + CGM group, 77% in the Injections + CGM group and 77% in the non-CGM group (p = 0.134 without adjustment; and p = 0.316 with adjustment for sex, age, duration of diabetes, highest educational level and annual household income). Only 28% of study participants met the target of performing at least 150 min of moderate to vigorous PA per week.
conclusionsCompared with other treatment modalities, AID users within the BETTER T1D registry tended to engage in more frequent and longer PA. However, these differences may be attributed to sociodemographic factors rather than the technologies themselves. Our study also shows a low percentage of participants meeting PA recommendations. Continued research and development on diabetes technologies, more personalized interventions and public health strategies are needed.
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.