ReviewCureus2022
Comparative Analysis of Inhaled Insulin With Other Types in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advanced Multiscale Inhalation Platforms for Treatment of Pulmonary Diseases.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Spray drying: From a traditional technology to modern biotechnological applications.International journal of pharmaceutics: X · 2025Review
- Twenty years of inhaled insulin: promise, setbacks, and future directions.EXCLI journal · 2025Article
- Pulmonary inhalation for disease treatment: Basic research and clinical translations.Materials today. Bio · 2024Review
- CVOT Summit 2022 Report: new cardiovascular, kidney, and glycemic outcomes.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2023Article
- Type 1 diabetes - What's new in prevention and therapeutic strategies?Pediatric endocrinology, diabetes, and metabolism · 2023Article
- Inhaled Insulin Dosing in a Randomized Trial in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes.AACE endocrinology and diabetesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To analyze the effect of Inhaled insulin in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus and compare it with other routes of administration of Insulin. A systemic search was conducted from the following electronic databases: PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, from inception to 28th January 2022. All statistical analysis was conducted in Review Manager 5.4.1. All studies meeting inclusion criteria were selected. A random-effect model was used to pool the studies, and the result was reported in the Standard Mean Difference (SMD), Mean Difference (MD), and Risk Ratio (RR) with their corresponding 95% Confidence interval (CI). Thirteen randomized control trials were selected for our meta-analysis. Statistically significant results were obtained for comparing change in weight after insulin administration (MD= -1.08 [-1.21, -0.94]; p< 0.00001; I2= 74%). Other factors assessed were found to be non-significant like HbA1c (SMD= 0.03 [-0.80, 0.86]; p= 0.95; I2= 99%), fasting blood sugar (SMD= -0.31 [-1.52, 0.91]; p= 0.62; I2= 99%) and adverse effects (RR= 1.06 [0.97, 1.16]; p= 0.18; I2= 96%). In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that inhaled insulin is equally effective as subcutaneously administered insulin in patients with Type 1 Diabetes. The inhaled insulin was found to show less weight gain and fewer hypoglycemic shifts, with a similar effect on the blood glucose level. No significant difference was observed in the incidence of adverse events.
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.