Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36900956›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

A Head-to-Head Comparison of Two Algorithms for Adjusting Mealtime Insulin Doses Based on CGM Trend Arrows in Adult Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: Results from an Exploratory Study.

Martina Parise, Sergio Di Molfetta, Roberta Teresa Graziano, Raffaella Fiorentino, Antonio Cutruzzolà, Agostino Gnasso, Concetta Irace

Open access · goldFull text readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Martina PariseDepartment of Health Science, University Magna Graecia, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.
Sergio Di MolfettaSection of Internal Medicine, Endocrinology, Andrology, and Metabolic Diseases, Department of Precision and Regenerative Medicine and Ionian Area, University of Bari, 70121 Bari, Italy.
Roberta Teresa GrazianoMedical School, University Magna Graecia, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.
Raffaella FiorentinoDiabetes Care Center, University Hospital Mater Domini, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.
Antonio CutruzzolàDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University Magna Graecia, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.
Agostino GnassoDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University Magna Graecia, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.
Concetta IraceDepartment of Health Science, University Magna Graecia, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5182-5473
Magna Graecia University · ITAzienda Ospedaliero Universitario Mater Domini · ITUniversity of Bari Aldo Moro · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundContinuous glucose monitoring (CGM) users are encouraged to consider trend arrows before injecting a meal bolus. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of two different algorithms for trend-informed bolus adjustments, the Diabetes Research in Children Network/Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (DirectNet/JDRF) and the Ziegler algorithm, in type 1 diabetes.

methodsWe conducted a cross-over study of type 1 diabetes patients using Dexcom G6. Participants were randomly assigned to either the DirectNet/JDRF or the Ziegler algorithm for two weeks. After a 7-day wash-out period with no trend-informed bolus adjustments, they crossed to the alternative algorithm.

resultsTwenty patients, with an average age of 36 ± 10 years, completed this study. Compared to the baseline and the DirectNet/JDRF algorithm, the Ziegler algorithm was associated with a significantly higher time in range (TIR) and lower time above range and mean glucose. A separate analysis of patients on CSII and MDI revealed that the Ziegler algorithm provides better glucose control and variability than DirectNet/JDRF in CSII-treated patients. The two algorithms were equally effective in increasing TIR in MDI-treated patients. No severe hypoglycemic or hyperglycemic episode occurred during the study.

conclusionsThe Ziegler algorithm is safe and may provide better glucose control and variability than the DirectNet/JDRF over a two-week period, especially in patients treated with CSII.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1InsulinAdultAlgorithmsBlood GlucoseBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringChildCross-Over StudiesHumansHypoglycemic AgentsMiddle AgedBlood GlucoseHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinbolusbolus adjustmentcontinuous glucose monitoringglucose variabilitytime in rangetrend arrowstype 1 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID36900956
PMCPMC10002216
OpenAlexW4321599465

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read43
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.