ArticleDiabetes care2026
Persistent Burden of Severe Hypoglycemia and Impaired Awareness of Hypoglycemia Among People With Type 1 Diabetes Despite Technology Use: A Follow-up Survey.
Article in Diabetes care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unconscious uncoupling: dysfunctional neurovascular responses to low glucose in type 1 diabetes and impaired hypoglycemia awareness.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2026Article
- Ethical Considerations in Islet Xenotransplantation.XenotransplantationReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess longitudinal trends in glycemic metrics, prevalence of severe hypoglycemic events (SHEs), impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH), and technology use (continuous glucose monitoring [CGM], automated insulin delivery [AID]) in a real-world U.S. cohort of adults with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsThis was a cross-sectional study of adults with type 1 diabetes conducted ∼2 years after participants enrolled in the original retrospective observational study. Participants self-reported technology use, insulin delivery method, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), IAH, and SHEs. Change was assessed among these variables from the initial and follow-up study.
resultsApproximately 2 years after the original survey, 1,056 adults responded to the follow-up survey and were eligible for analysis (53% response rate; mean [SD] age: 46 [16] years; mean [SD] type 1 diabetes duration: 29 [16] years; 71% female; 97% White). Most reported using CGM in the original study (91.8%) and at follow-up (94.4%), while the use of AID increased 17.7%. In the original study, 61.7% reported HbA1c <7% vs. 67.4% at follow-up. Proportions of individuals with IAH and SHEs remained high at ∼30% and ∼20%, respectively, in both studies.
conclusionsAlthough most participants used CGM and the use of AID increased, approximately one-third of respondents did not achieve HbA1c targets, ∼20% continued to have SHEs in the last year, and ∼30% had IAH. This highlights that while CGM and AID systems are a significant advancement, their use alone has not mitigated the risk of severe hypoglycemia, and glucose management still remains suboptimal.
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.