Trial reportJournal of diabetes science and technology2023
Outcomes in Pump- and CGM-Baseline Use Subgroups in the International Diabetes Closed-Loop Trial.
Trial report in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- 2023 Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diabetes Management in Korea: Full Version Recommendation of the Korean Diabetes Association.Diabetes & metabolism journal · 2024Guideline
- Sensor-based digital health technologies to capture endpoints in recent clinical trials: a scoping review.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Technology readiness associated with insulin pump and automated insulin delivery system use in young adults with type 1 diabetes.Journal of health psychology · 2026Article
- New Technologies for Blood Glucose Management in Elderly Diabetics: An Interpretation of theAging medicine (Milton (N.S.W)) · 2025Review
- 2025 Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diabetes Management in Korea: Recommendation of the Korean Diabetes Association.Diabetes & metabolism journal · 2025Article
- 7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2025.Diabetes care · 2025Review
- Heterogeneity of glycaemic phenotypes in type 1 diabetes.Diabetologia · 2024Article
- 7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024.Diabetes care · 2024Review
- Utility and precision evidence of technology in the treatment of type 1 diabetes: a systematic review.Communications medicine · 2023Article
- A Systematic Review of Commercial Hybrid Closed-Loop Automated Insulin Delivery Systems.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2023 · on this mapReview
- One-year follow-up comparison of two hybrid closed-loop systems in Italian children and adults with type 1 diabetes.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe investigated the potential benefits of automated insulin delivery (AID) among individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in sub-populations of baseline device use determined by continuous glucose monitor (CGM) use status and insulin delivery via multiple daily injections (MDI) or insulin pump. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn a six-month randomized, multicenter trial, 168 individuals were assigned to closed-loop control (CLC, Control-IQ, Tandem Diabetes Care), or sensor-augmented pump (SAP) therapy. The trial included a two- to eight-week run-in phase to train participants on study devices. The participants were stratified into four subgroups: insulin pump and CGM (pump+CGM), pump-only, MDI and CGM (MDI+CGM), and MDI users without CGM (MDI-only) users. We compared glycemic outcomes among four subgroups.
resultsAt baseline, 61% were pump+CGM users, 18% pump-only users, 10% MDI+CGM users, and 11% MDI-only users. Mean time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR) improved from baseline in the four subgroups using CLC: pump+CGM, 62% to 73%; pump-only, 61% to 70%; MDI+CGM, 54% to 68%; and MDI-only, 61% to 69%. The reduction in time below 70 mg/dL from baseline was comparable among the four subgroups. No interaction effect was detected with baseline device use for TIR (
conclusionsThere was a consistent benefit in patients with T1D when using CLC, regardless of baseline insulin delivery modality or CGM use. These data suggest that this CLC system can be considered across a wide range of patients.
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.