ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2018
From Wary Wearers to d-Embracers: Personas of Readiness to Use Diabetes Devices.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- A parallel randomised controlled trial of the Hypoglycaemia Awareness Restoration Programme for adults with type 1 diabetes and problematic hypoglycaemia despite optimised self-care (HARPdoc).Nature communications · 2022Trial
- Glucose management for rewards: A randomized trial to improve glucose monitoring and associated self-management behaviors in adolescents with type 1 diabetes.Pediatric diabetes · 2019Trial
- Barriers to use of continuous glucose monitoring among adults with type 2 diabetes.Diabetes research and clinical practice · 2026Article
- Building the evidence to address disparities in type 1 diabetes (BEAD-T1D): methods and design of a study examining barriers and promoters to diabetes device use in families with public insurance.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Concept and Implementation of a Novel Continuous Glucose Monitoring Solution With Glucose Predictions on Board.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2024Article
- Zooming In, Then Out: Why We Must Apply Human-Centered Design to Transform Diabetes Technology.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2024Article
- Experience with burdens of diabetes device use that affect uptake and optimal use in people with type 1 diabetes.Endocrine connections · 2023Review
- DiabetesWise: An innovative approach to promoting diabetes device awareness.Journal of diabetes · 2023Article
- Patient-Reported Usefulness and Challenges in Using Hypoglycemia-Informing Features of Continuous Glucose Monitors to Manage Hypoglycemia.The science of diabetes self-management and care · 2023Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to Diabetes Device Adoption for People with Type 1 Diabetes.Current diabetes reports · 2022Review
- Patient Work Personas of Type 2 Diabetes-A Data-Driven Approach to Persona Development and Validation.Frontiers in digital health · 2022Article
- Competing Demands of Young Adulthood and Diabetes: A Discussion of Major Life Changes and Strategies for Health Care Providers to Promote Successful Balance.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2021Article
- Help when you need it: Perspectives of adults with T1D on the support and training they would have wanted when starting CGM.Diabetes research and clinical practice · 2021Article
- Evaluating the relationship between clinical and demographic characteristics of insulin-using people with diabetes and their health outcomes: a cluster analysis application.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Fostering Engagement With Health and Housing Innovation: Development of Participant Personas in a Social Housing Cohort.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2021Article
- Evaluation of Patient Willingness to Adopt Remote Digital Monitoring for Diabetes Management.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Glycemic control and self-rated health among ethnically diverse adolescents with type 1 diabetes.Pediatric diabetes · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDiabetes devices such as insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) are associated with improved health and quality of life in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). However, uptake remains low. The aim of this study was to develop different "personas" of adults with T1D in relation to readiness to adopt new diabetes technology.
methodsParticipants were 1498 T1D Exchange participants who completed surveys on barriers to uptake, technology attitudes, and other psychosocial variables. HbA1c data was available from the T1D Exchange for 30% of the sample. K-means cluster analyses grouped the sample by device barriers and attitudes. The authors assigned descriptive labels based on cluster characteristics. ANOVAs and chi-square tests assessed group differences by demographic and psychosocial variables (eg, diabetes duration, diabetes distress).
resultsAnalyses yielded five distinct personas. The d-Embracers (54% of participants) endorsed few barriers to device use and had the highest rates of device use, lowest HbA1c, and were the least distressed. The Free Rangers (23%) had the most negative technology attitudes. The Data Minimalists (10%) used pumps but had lower CGM use and did not want more diabetes information. The Wary Wearers (11%) had lower overall device use, were younger, more distressed, endorsed many barriers, and had higher HbA1c. The High Distress (3%) group members were the youngest, had the shortest diabetes duration, reported the most barriers, and were the most distressed.
conclusionThese clinically meaningful personas of device readiness can inform tailored interventions targeting barriers and psychosocial needs to increase device uptake.
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.