ArticleDiabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders2025
Perceptions of Suboptimal Insulin Dosing from People with Diabetes and Healthcare Professionals in Germany.
Article in Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Insulin pens and the digital ecosystem.Diabetologia · 2026Review
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
introductionDespite advancements in diabetes therapeutics and innovations, suboptimal dosing continues to be a barrier to glycaemic control for people with diabetes (PwD). This study aimed to understand the extent of suboptimal insulin dosing and the factors underlying this behaviour from the perspective of PwD and healthcare professionals (HCPs) in Germany.
methodsThis analysis included 400 German PwD employing analogue insulin pens (type 1 diabetes, n = 100; type 2 diabetes, n = 300) and 160 HCPs (general practitioners, n = 80; specialists, n = 80), and was part of a cross-sectional, multinational, noninterventional web-based survey (1150 PwD and 640 HCPs). The proportion of PwD reporting missed/mistimed/miscalculated insulin doses and the mean ± SD number of insulin doses missed/mistimed/miscalculated within the last 30 days were analysed.
resultsAmong the 400 PwD (69.5% male, 30.5% female), the mean age was 47.1 ± 13.0 years. Within the last 30 days, 47.3% of PwD missed basal insulin doses (3.5 ± 2.9 mean number of insulin doses missed) and 58.0% missed bolus insulin doses (5.0 ± 10.1). Additionally, 47.3% and 51.0% mistimed basal insulin doses (3.9 ± 4.3 mean number of insulin doses mistimed) and bolus insulin doses (5.0 ± 7.1), respectively, and 47.5% and 63.3% PwD miscalculated basal insulin doses (4.5 ± 5.0 mean number of insulin doses miscalculated) and bolus insulin doses (5.5 ± 7.5), respectively. Of the 160 HCPs (73.1% male, 26.9% female), 98.1% were qualified for > 5 years. Overall, ≥ 67% HCPs indicated that up to 30% of PwD missed/forgot/skipped, mistimed, or miscalculated an insulin dose in the last 30 days. Reasons reported by PwD and HCPs included forgetting, being out of their normal routine, being too busy or distracted, or being unsure of how much insulin to take. PwD and HCPs suggested that having a device that automatically records glucose measurements, insulin doses, and timing and having dosing calculation guidance and real-time feedback on how insulin dosing impacts glucose levels would optimise insulin dosing.
conclusionPwD are mismanaging insulin doses largely for preventable reasons. Integrated and automated insulin dosing support may optimise insulin management and improve communication between PwD and HCPs.
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.