Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28264186›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2017

Analysis of "Randomized Cross-Over Study Comparing Two Infusion Sets for CSII in Daily Life".

Eric Renard

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Eric Renard1 Department of Endocrinology, Montpellier University Hospital, Diabetes, Nutrition, Montpellier, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In an article in Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, Freckmann et al report an evaluation of 2 infusion sets used for CSII in daily life, both from Roche. Because the 2 catheters differed at the soft cannula level in terms of geometry and introducer needle, focus was made on pain at insertion. While no significant difference was noted on this primary endpoint, unplanned catheter changes occurred in close to 20% of cases also with both catheter models, mainly driven by apparent insulin delivery issues. Since kinked cannulas were not frequent, there is a clear need for better understanding of "unexplained hyperglycemia" as the main reason for reduction of catheter lifetime. Fixing this weak aspect of CSII becomes crucial while moving toward closed-loop insulin delivery.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1Insulin Infusion SystemsBlood GlucoseClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicCross-Over StudiesHumansInsulinMulticenter Studies as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicBlood GlucoseInsulinCSIIdiabetesinfusion setinsulin pump

Identifiers

PMID28264186
PMCPMC5478030

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.