Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18351320›Full record

SynthesisDiabetologia2008

Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion versus multiple daily insulin injections in patients with diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis.

K Jeitler, K Horvath, A Berghold, T W Gratzer, K Neeser, T R Pieber, A Siebenhofer

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Diabetologia, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 98 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
98citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
16.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

98 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 373 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [Diabetes technology (Update 2026)].Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2026
    Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Diabetes: glycaemic control in type 1.BMJ clinical evidence · 2011
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. A Mini-Patch Magnetic Insulin Pump for Enhanced Delivery Resolution and Accuracy.Advanced intelligent systems (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

38 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

K JeitlerDiabetes and Metabolism Outpatient Clinic, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 15, 8036 Graz, Austria. klaus.jeitler@klinikum-graz.at
K Horvath
A Berghold
T W Gratzer
K Neeser
T R Pieber
A Siebenhofer
Medical University of Graz · ATMedical Technologies (Czechia) · CZInstitute for Medical Informatics and Biostatistics · CHJoanneum Research · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsWe compared the effects of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) with those of multiple daily insulin (MDI) injections on glycaemic control, risk of hypoglycaemic episodes, insulin requirements and adverse events in type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus.

methodsThe electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were systematically searched for randomised controlled trials up to March 2007. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed.

resultsOverall, 22 studies were included (17 on type 1 diabetes mellitus, two on type 2 diabetes mellitus, three on children). With regard to adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus, our meta-analysis found a between-treatment difference of -0.4% HbA(1c) (six studies) in favour of CSII therapy. Available median rates of mild or overall hypoglycaemic events were comparable between the different interventions (1.9 [0.9-3.1] [CSII] vs 1.7 [1.1-3.3] [MDI] events per patient per week). Total daily insulin requirements were lower with CSII than with MDI therapy. In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, CSII and MDI treatment showed no statistically significant difference for HbA(1c). The incidence of mild hypoglycaemic events was comparable between the treatment groups. In adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus, glycated haemoglobin and insulin requirements were significantly lower in the CSII groups; no data were available on hypoglycaemic events. The only study performed in younger children did not provide enough data for conclusive inferences. No overall conclusions were possible for severe hypoglycaemia and adverse events for any of the different patient groups due to rareness of such events, different definitions and insufficient reporting. CONCLUSIONS/

interpretationCSII therapy in adults and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus resulted in a greater reduction of glycated haemoglobin, in adult patients without a higher rate of hypoglycaemia. No beneficial effect of CSII therapy could be detected for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Indexed as

Insulin Infusion SystemsAdultChildDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2HumansHypoglycemiaHypoglycemic AgentsInjections, SubcutaneousInsulinRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin

Identifiers

PMID18351320
OpenAlexW1974413439

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.