Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35533142›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2023

People With Diabetes and Caregivers Prefer Rescue Glucagon Treatment With a Wider Storage Temperature Range and a Nasal Administration, When Efficacy is Similar: A Discrete Choice Experiment in Spain.

Beth D Mitchell, Anne M Rentz, Shannon Kummer, Yu Yan, Sebastian Heidenreich, Nicolas Krucien, Esther Artime, Beatrice Osumili, Miriam Rubio, Heather L Gelhorn

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Systematic Literature Review and Indirect Treatment Comparison of Three Ready-to-Use Glucagon Treatments for Severe Hypoglycemia.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2023
    Review
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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Beth D MitchellEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Anne M RentzEvidera, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Shannon KummerEvidera, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Yu YanEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Sebastian HeidenreichEvidera, London, UK.
Nicolas KrucienEvidera, London, UK.
Esther ArtimeEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Beatrice OsumiliEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Miriam RubioEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Heather L GelhornEvidera, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Eli Lilly (United States) · USIthaka Harbors · USEVRAZ (United Kingdom) · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConventional injectable glucagon (IG) and nasal glucagon (NG), both having similar efficacy, are two options for the emergency treatment of severe hypoglycemia in Spain. This study elicited the effect of changes in key attributes on preferences for NG and IG medication profiles of people with diabetes and caregivers in Spain.

methodsThe relative attribute importance (RAI) that participants placed on glucagon preparation, preparation and administration time, delivery method, recovery time, device size, storage temperature, and headache risk was estimated from an online discrete choice experiment. In addition, patients and caregivers were presented with NG and IG profiles that included rates of successful administration; the proportion of participants choosing each profile was summarized.

resultsThe analysis included 276 adults with diabetes (65% type 1) and 270 caregivers (49% type 1). Overall mean age was 40 years; 51% were female. The most important attributes were storage temperature (RAI [95% confidence interval] = 27.3% [22.9-32.2]) and delivery method (17.4% [13.1-21.9]). Headache risk (16.2% [11.8-20.7]), time to prepare and administer (14.5% [10.1-18.8]), glucagon preparation (11.4% [6.8-15.8]), recovery time (8.9% [4.3-13.3]), and device size (4.3% [0.3-8.8]) were also relevant. When comparing medication profiles, significantly more participants (78%) preferred NG over IG profiles (

conclusionAdults with diabetes and caregivers prefer a glucagon treatment with a higher rate of successful administration, wider storage temperature, and nasal delivery method, when efficacy is similar. Participants favored NG over conventional IG as a rescue medication for severe hypoglycemia. This information may help decision-making by payers and treatment discussions between health care professionals and patients.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusHypoglycemiaAdministration, IntranasalAdultCaregiversFemaleGlucagonHeadacheHumansMaleSpainTemperatureGlucagondiabetesglucagonnasal administrationpatient preference

Identifiers

PMID35533142
PMCPMC10658678
OpenAlexW4229440191

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.