ArticleJournal of clinical medicine research2026
Comparative Effectiveness of Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion Versus Multiple Daily Injections on Glycemic Control in Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Intensive insulin therapy is crucial for mitigating complications in pediatric type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). This study aimed to evaluate the impact of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) versus multiple daily injections (MDI) on glycemic control and safety in pediatric patients. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to 2026. Data were synthesized using random-effects meta-analysis to calculate mean differences (MD) for hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and risk ratios (RR) for adverse events. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was employed to assess the sufficiency of evidence. Certainty of evidence was graded using the Grades of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results: Fourteen RCTs involving 659 participants were included. CSII was associated with a modest reduction in HbA1c compared to MDI (MD -0.36%; 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.80 to 0.08), although this did not reach statistical significance in the primary analysis (P = 0.098). However, sensitivity analysis excluding one large pragmatic trial revealed a significant benefit for CSII (MD -0.27%, P < 0.0001). No significant differences were found in the risks of severe hypoglycemia (RR = 0.83) or diabetic ketoacidosis (RR = 1.40). TSA indicated that the required information size for a definitive conclusion on HbA1c has not yet been met. Conclusions: CSII may offer a modest glycemic advantage over MDI in pediatric T1DM without increasing safety risks; however, current randomized evidence is insufficient to universally recommend one modality over the other. Treatment choice should be personalized. Although the proportion of patients using automated insulin delivery (AID) is rising rapidly, CSII retains practical and cost advantages; future research should focus on modern AID systems.
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.