ArticleJournal of clinical & translational endocrinology2024
The bio-artificial pancreas to treat type 1 diabetes: Perspectives from healthcare professionals in the Netherlands.
Article in Journal of clinical & translational endocrinology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Healthcare professionals are relevant stakeholders because of their gatekeeper role in the clinic. This study aims to explore their perspectives on the potential future clinical implementation of the bio-artificial pancreas (BAP) for people with type 1 diabetes, and suitable target groups. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 healthcare professionals, including endocrinologists, nurses, and pancreas transplant surgeons. Inclusion was stopped once data saturation was reached. The audiotaped interviews were transcribed verbatim. Qualitative content analysis using an inductive approach was conducted to develop themes within a coding framework. Results: Three main themes emerged: (1) hoped-for benefits, which included improved clinical outcomes, enhanced sense of normality, reduced mental burden for patients and their significant others, greater societal participation, and lower costs; (2) concerns, which included safety and effectiveness, inequitable access, accurate information, control over self-management, and organizational challenges; and (3) allocating the BAP during initial implementation, which included prioritizing people who lack effective treatment options, people with mental health issues, and vulnerable people. Conclusions: The results of this study are important for researchers and practitioners involved in the development of the BAP, so that they can align its design and the process of clinical implementation with healthcare professionals' perspectives.
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.