SynthesisDiabetes, obesity & metabolism2026
Efficacy and safety of once-weekly insulins in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2026. The graph read 2 numbers from its abstract, feeding 2 cells of the map, but none could be read as for or against, so it casts no vote. 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.
Read, but not usablea number the graph found but could not read as for or against
The incidence of clinically significant or severe hypoglycaemia did not differ between groups (pooled incidence rate ratio: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.79 to 1.28, p = 0.75).
OW insulins achieved a greater reduction in HbA1c compared to once-daily insulin or semaglutide (pooled mean difference: -0.12%, 95% CI: -0.19 to -0.04, p = 0.007).
clause the extractor read what became the number
Where it lands on the map
Rows are treatments, columns are outcomes. The coloured squares are the cells this paper feeds, coloured by the vote it casts there. Click one to jump to what this paper adds to it.
What it adds to each cell
For every cell the paper feeds: the belief in the claim with and without this paper, and this paper's estimate drawn against every other readable study in the cell. The ringed dot is this paper.
GLP-1 receptor agonists×glycemic control
No readable resultOpen on the map →What to test next →40 readable studies in this cell: 96 favour the treatment, 17 find no difference, 10 favour the comparator.
This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.
Insulin×glycemic control
No readable resultOpen on the map →What to test next →40 readable studies in this cell: 15 favour the treatment, 14 find no difference, 14 favour the comparator.
This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.
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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The marked sentences are the ones the graph read a number from.
aimsOnce-weekly (OW) insulins represent a promising strategy to reduce injection burden and improve adherence in type 2 diabetes management. This meta-analysis aimed to quantify pooled effect sizes for key biological and clinical outcomes, integrating new findings from the five large trials published in 2025. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, WoS, ClinicalTrials.gov and EU Clinical Trials databases up to June 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating OW insulins in type 2 diabetes. Primary outcomes included efficacy (HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), time-in-range (TIR), time-above-range) and safety outcomes (body weight, hypoglycaemia, time-below-range). Data were analysed using both frequentist and Bayesian approaches.
resultsAmong 435 screened records, 16 RCTs were included. OW insulins achieved a greater reduction in HbA1c compared to once-daily insulin or semaglutide (pooled mean difference: -0.12%, 95% CI: -0.19 to -0.04, p = 0.007). TIR was significantly longer in the OW insulin group (+2.41% of total time, 95% CI: 1.13 to 3.69, p = 0.002), while FPG changes were comparable (-3.37 mg/dL, 95% CI: -7.95 to 1.21 mg/dL, p = 0.14). Body weight changes were generally similar, but excluding trials using IcoSema revealed a modest weight gain (+0.33 kg, 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.62, p = 0.030). The incidence of clinically significant or severe hypoglycaemia did not differ between groups (pooled incidence rate ratio: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.79 to 1.28, p = 0.75). Meta-regression confirmed consistent effect sizes across OW insulin types, treatment durations and prior insulin regimens.
conclusionsOW insulins modestly improve glycaemic control without increasing hypoglycaemia risk, though slight weight gain may occur.
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.