SynthesisDrug delivery2025
Efficacy, safety, and patient-centered outcomes of needle-free injectors versus insulin pens in diabetes management: a comprehensive meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Drug delivery, 2025. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the comparative effectiveness, safety, and patient acceptance of needle-free injectors and insulin pens through a meta-analysis. A thorough literature search was performed across multiple databases, including CNKI, the Weipu Database, the Wanfang Database, PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the use of needle-free injectors and insulin pens in diabetes treatment, with a time frame from database inception until June 2024. Five researchers carefully screened the literature in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, assessed study quality with validated tools and conducted the meta-analysis using RevMan 5.4. This study included 22 publications encompassing 22 studies, involving a total of 2,580 patients, with 1,290 in the needle-free group and 1,290 in the insulin pen group. The findings suggest that needle-free injectors were superior to insulin pens in improving treatment efficacy, local adverse reactions, and increasing patient acceptability, with statistically significant differences. However, no significant variations were observed in continuous glucose monitoring. Needle-free injectors can improve certain aspects of glycemic control, such as reducing HbA1c, FPG, and 2hPPG; improve local adverse reactions and increase patient acceptability. However, improvements in glycemic variability metrics were not statistically significant, indicating that further research is needed to fully assess their long-term safety and therapeutic effectiveness. In terms of systemic safety, the risk of hypoglycemia in the needle-free group was not significantly different from that in the needle group (
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.