ArticleFrontiers in clinical diabetes and healthcare2024
Technology usage and glycaemic outcomes in a single tertiary centre with an ethnically diverse and socioeconomically deprived cohort of children with type 1 diabetes mellitus.
Article in Frontiers in clinical diabetes and healthcare, 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
Background: The UK National Paediatric Diabetes Audit (NPDA) data reports disparities in Haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels among children and young people (CYP) with Type 1 Diabetes (T1D), with higher levels in those of Black ethnic background and lower socioeconomic status who have less access to technology. We investigate HbA1c differences in a T1D cohort with higher than national average technology uptake where > 60% come from an ethnic minority and/or socioeconomically deprived population. Design & methods: Retrospective cross-sectional study investigating the influence of demographic factors, technology use, and socioeconomic status (SES) on glycaemic outcomes. The study population was 222 CYP with T1D who attended the diabetes clinic in 2022 at a single tertiary paediatric diabetes centre. Results: Among 222 CYP, 60% were of ethnic minority (Asian, Black, Mixed and Other were 32%, 12%, 6% and 10% respectively) and 40% of white heritage. 94% used Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) and 60% used Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion (CSII) via open or closed loop. 6% used Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose (SMBG) and Multiple Daily Injections (MDI), 34% used CGM and MDI, 38% used CGM and CSII and 22% used Hybrid Closed-Loop (HCL) systems. Significant differences in HbA1c across therapy groups (p < 0.001) was noted with lowest HbA1c in HCL group (55 mmol/mol; p <0.001). Despite adjusting for therapy type, the Black group had higher HbA1c than their white and Asian counterparts (p<0.001). CYP from the most deprived tertile had significantly higher HbA1c levels (p < 0.001) but the difference was not sustained after adjusting for therapy type. Conclusion: Advanced diabetes technologies improve glycaemic control. Whilst equalising technology access mitigates socioeconomic disparities in HbA1c, CYP from Black ethnic background continue to display a higher HbA1c. The study underscores the necessity of fair technology distribution and further research into elevated HbA1c levels among Black CYP using advanced diabetes technology.
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.