Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27340247›Full record

Trial reportJournal of diabetes science and technology2017

Recruitment Into a Pediatric Continuous Glucose Monitoring RCT.

Lisa K Volkening, Kaitlin C Gaffney, Michelle L Katz, Lori M Laffel

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01472159 (Optimizing CGM Use and Metabolic Outcomes in Youth With Type 1 Diabetes), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT01472159 nacompletednot on this map

Optimizing CGM Use and Metabolic Outcomes in Youth With Type 1 Diabetes

TypeinterventionalSponsorJoslin Diabetes CenterRan2011 to 2015Enrolled130ConditionsType 1 DiabetesArmsCGM Family Teamwork Intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
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

4 authors.

Lisa K Volkening1 Section on Clinical, Behavioral & Outcomes Research, Pediatric, Adolescent, and Young Adult Section, Joslin Diabetes Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Kaitlin C Gaffney1 Section on Clinical, Behavioral & Outcomes Research, Pediatric, Adolescent, and Young Adult Section, Joslin Diabetes Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Michelle L Katz1 Section on Clinical, Behavioral & Outcomes Research, Pediatric, Adolescent, and Young Adult Section, Joslin Diabetes Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Lori M Laffel1 Section on Clinical, Behavioral & Outcomes Research, Pediatric, Adolescent, and Young Adult Section, Joslin Diabetes Center, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

SPECIAL ASSAY COREP30DK036836 · NIDDK · JOSLIN DIABETES CENTER · PI JEAN E. SCHAFFER · 1986 to 2026
$50.5M
TRAINING IN DIABETES AND METABOLISMT32DK007260 · NIDDK · JOSLIN DIABETES CENTER · PI LAURIE J GOODYEAR · 1986 to 2026
$13.6M
CAREER DEVELOPMENT IN DIABETES RESEARCH FOR PEDIATRIC ENDOCRINOLOGISTSK12DK094721 · NIDDK · BOSTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL · PI LAFFEL, LORI M, WHITE, MORRIS F. · 2011 to 2021
$6.3M
Optimizing CGM Use and Metabolic Outcomes in Youth with Type 1 DiabetesR01DK089349 · NIDDK · JOSLIN DIABETES CENTER · PI LAFFEL, LORI M · 2010 to 2013
$2.8M
NIDDK NIH HHS K12 DK094721NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK036836NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK089349NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK007260
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose was to identify patient/family characteristics and recruitment process characteristics associated with the decision to participate in a 2-year continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) RCT for youth with type 1 diabetes and their families.

methodStudy staff approached patients who were conditionally eligible according to medical record review or referred by a provider. We categorized families according to participation decision (agree vs decline) and timing of decision (day of approach vs later ["thinkers"]).

resultsOver 18 months, we approached 456 eligible patients; 19% agreed on the day of approach, 10% agreed later, 42% declined on the day of approach, and 30% declined later. Agreers were younger ( P = .002), had shorter diabetes duration ( P = .0003), had a lower insulin dose ( P = .02), checked blood glucose levels more often ( P = .002), and were more likely to use pump therapy ( P = .009) than decliners. Patients/families were more likely to agree in fall/winter (41%) than spring/summer (19%, P < .0001). Of decliners, 50% cited no interest in CGM as the reason for nonparticipation. Among thinkers, 49% of patients who made a decision within 2 weeks of being approached agreed; only 15% of thinkers who made a decision >2 weeks after being approached agreed to participate ( P < .0001).

conclusionsRecruitment is a critical and often challenging phase of clinical trials. Recruitment to pediatric CGM studies may be especially challenging due to youths' reluctance to use CGM. These data provide an opportunity to better understand and possibly optimize recruitment into future pediatric CGM studies and other studies of advanced diabetes technologies.

Indexed as

Blood Glucose Self-MonitoringParentsPatient SelectionAdolescentChildDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1FemaleHumansMalePatient Education as Topicclinical researchcontinuous glucose monitoringpediatricsrecruitmenttype 1 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID27340247
PMCPMC5375065

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.