ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2013
Driving with diabetes: precaution, not prohibition, is the proper approach.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The use of diabetes technology under aviation conditions: A systematic review of human and in-vitro studies and future considerations.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026Pooled it
- In-flight glycaemic control using automated insulin delivery systems: A within-subject comparative pilot study.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Article
- Type 2 diabetes mellitus increases the severity of non-fatal injuries, but not the risk of fatal injuries, among driver victims of motor vehicle crashes in Taiwan.Epidemiology and health · 2022Article
- Could continuous glucose monitoring facilitate identifying diabetes patients with a higher risk of hypoglycemia during driving?Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Safety issues posed by driving with diabetes are primarily related to severe hypoglycemia, yet some public authorities rely on categorical restrictions on drivers with diabetes. This approach is misguided. Regulation of all drivers with diabetes, or all drivers using insulin, ignores the diversity of people with diabetes and fails to focus on the subpopulation posing the greatest risk. Advances in diabetes care technology and understanding of safety consequences of diabetes have expanded techniques available to limit risks of driving with diabetes. New means of insulin administration and blood glucose monitoring offer greater ease of anticipating and preventing hypoglycemia, and thus, limit driving risk for persons with diabetes. So too do less sophisticated steps taken by people with diabetes and the health care professionals they consult. These include adoption and endorsement of safety-sensitive behaviors, such as testing before a drive and periodic testing on longer trips. Overall, and in most individual cases, driving risks for persons with diabetes are less than those routinely tolerated by our society. Examples include freedom to drive in dangerous conditions and lax regulation of drivers in age and medical cohorts with elevated overall rates of driving mishaps. Data linking specific diabetes symptoms or features with driving risk are quite uncertain. Hence, there is much to recommend: a focus on technological advances, human precautions, and identifying individuals with diabetes with a specific history of driving difficulty. By contrast, available evidence does not support unfocused regulation of all or most drivers with diabetes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.