ArticlePatient preference and adherence2013
Evaluation of preference for a novel durable insulin pen with memory function among patients with diabetes and health care professionals.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04847778 (Randomized Clinical Trial to Assess the Efficacy of the System Insulclock® 360 for Insulin Treatment Management in Type 1 Diabetes Patients With Insufficient Glycemic Control), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 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.
Randomized Clinical Trial to Assess the Efficacy of the System Insulclock® 360 for Insulin Treatment Management in Type 1 Diabetes Patients With Insufficient Glycemic Control
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy of a Smart Insulin Pen Cap for the Management of Patients with Uncontrolled Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Cross-Over Trial.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2023Trial
- New Technologies for Blood Glucose Management in Elderly Diabetics: An Interpretation of theAging medicine (Milton (N.S.W)) · 2025Review
- Advancing Telemedicine Using Smart Insulin Pens with Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Telecommunication Systems: A Case Series.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Digital Diabetes Management: A Literature Review of Smart Insulin Pens.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2022Review
- Development of an Insulin Pen is a Patient-Centric Multidisciplinary Undertaking: A Commentary.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2022Article
- Patient Perceptions and Preferences for a Mealtime Insulin Delivery Patch.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2018Article
- Half-Unit Insulin Pens: Disease Management in Patients With Diabetes Who Are Sensitive to Insulin.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2017Review
- Biosimilar insulins: a European perspective.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2015Review
- The Relationship between Cognitive Appraisal and Adherence to Medical Regimens in Type 2 Diabetic Patients.Journal of caring sciences · 2014Article
- The effect of medical device dose-memory functions on patients' adherence to treatment, confidence, and disease self-management.Patient preference and adherence · 2014Review
- Use of technology when assessing adherence to diabetes self-management behaviors.Current diabetes reports · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImproving adherence to insulin treatment for better glycemic control remains a challenge in the management of diabetes. New technological aids are required to help support adherence. This study evaluated preference for the NovoPen(®) 5 (NP5), a durable insulin pen with memory function, compared with the HumaPen Luxura(®) (HPL) among patients with diabetes and health care professionals.
methodsThis crossover, multicenter usability study included insulin pen-experienced patients with diabetes and health care professionals treating patients with diabetes in Canada, China, and Germany. Participants evaluated NP5 and HPL in a randomized order by performing handling tasks in a usability test related to everyday use during a face-to-face interview. Tasks, pens, and preferences were assessed by completing a questionnaire comprised of rating and open-ended questions relating to confidence in everyday diabetes management.
resultsOverall, 300 patients with diabetes and 150 health care professionals participated in the study. Significantly more participants preferred NP5 (81%) to HPL (18%) (P < 0.001). Also, 82% of patients with diabetes had more confidence in NP5 for managing their daily injections versus 11% with HPL (P < 0.001), and 7% had no preference. Memory function was most helpful in giving patients with diabetes confidence about when they last injected (63%), how much insulin they last injected (62%) and improving diabetes management (55%). Participants gave higher ratings to NP5 than to HPL on all parameters relating to performing an injection (ease of handling, satisfaction when using the pen, convenience of using the pen day-to-day, quality of the pen, and the extent to which the pen meets their needs; P < 0.05 for all comparisons).
conclusionNP5 was preferred to HPL by most participants. Significantly more patients with diabetes had more confidence for managing daily insulin injections when using NP5, the pen with a memory function.
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.