SynthesisDiabetologia2026
Psychosocial implications, acceptability and ethics of screening for paediatric type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and mixed methods evidence synthesis.
Synthesis in Diabetologia, 2026. 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
29 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aims/hypothesisPaediatric population screening for type 1 diabetes is emerging internationally. It is critically important to understand the acceptability of screening to inform these initiatives. In this systematic review, we aimed to assess the psychosocial impact, acceptability and ethics of screening for paediatric type 1 diabetes.
methodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, APA PsycInfo, ASSIA, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, and included quantitative, mixed methods and qualitative articles until 25 November 2025. We assessed the emotional, cognitive and behavioural implications, acceptability or ethics of type 1 diabetes early detection for parents and/or children. We used the mixed methods appraisal tool and critical appraisal skills checklists for quality assessment. We performed a mixed methods evidence synthesis, identifying key themes from qualitative data and merging with quantitative data to generate meta-inferences.
resultsSeventy articles (12 qualitative, 57 quantitative and one mixed methods) involving 62,244 parents and 6363 children aged <18 years were included. Seven articles (10.0%) met all quality criteria (high quality), 43 (61.4%) met 60-80% of criteria (moderate quality) and 20 (28.6%) met <50% of criteria (low quality). We generated five themes and 19 sub-themes. Identification of early-stage type 1 diabetes generated anxiety, which waned over time but could recur. Overall, parents who opted into an early detection research programme valued knowing their child's risk and perceived benefits to outweigh harms, although paediatric blood sampling was considered challenging. Research ethics of screening centred on joint decision making according to the child's age, right to results disclosure and importance of data integrity. We synthesised a large pool of heterogenous studies, reflecting how understanding of early disease has evolved, but likely influencing the acceptability of screening. CONCLUSIONS/
interpretationThis, the most comprehensive review of the literature to date, demonstrates that despite the emotional, cognitive and behavioural implications, thus far, screening and early detection of paediatric type 1 diabetes appears to be acceptable to parents/guardians who take part but critical evidence gaps remain.
trial registrationPROSPERO registration no. CRD42024566937
fundingEDENT1FI (grant no. 101132379).
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.