ArticlePregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.)2026
Pregnancy and glycemic outcomes with hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery versus sensor-augmented pump therapy among women with type 1 diabetes.
Article in Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.), 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Pregnant women with type 1 diabetes (T1D) increasingly utilize hybrid closed-loop (HCL) pumps, but Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective study from 2022 to 2025. The exposure was intent to use HCL using non-pregnancy algorithms versus SAPT (reference) at the start of pregnancy. Outcomes included pregnancy outcomes (cesarean delivery, preeclampsia, preterm birth, small- and large-for-gestational-age, neonatal intensive care unit admission, neonatal hypoglycemia, neonatal hyperbilirubinemia, and respiratory distress syndrome) and glycemic measures the week before delivery (hemoglobin A1c and continuous glucose monitor metrics including time in range within a pregnancy-specific range [63-140 mg/dL], time above and below range, standard deviation, and mean glucose). An Inverse-Probability-of-Treatment Weighting analytic approach was used. Results: Among 154 women with T1D, 68.2% intended to use HCL and 31.8% SAPT when initiating prenatal care (median gestational age of 8.0 weeks [interquartile range {IQR}, 7.3, 9.3]). In adjusted analyses, women using HCL had neonates with a higher birthweight (3640 vs. 3430 g; adj. beta, 271.98; 95% CI, 0.31, 543.65) and mean sensor glucose the week prior to delivery (150.0 vs. 145.0 mg/dL; adj. beta, 13.36; 95% CI, 0.79, 25.93) and lower time below range compared with those using SAPT (2.0 vs. 4.0%; adj. beta, -3.73; 95% CI, -6.52, -0.93). Other pregnancy and glycemic outcomes did not differ between groups. Conclusion: Among a US cohort with T1D enrolled in a prenatal and diabetes care program, pregnancy and glycemic outcomes were similar between those using off-label HCL versus SAPT. Evaluating how HCL with pregnancy-specific algorithms can be used to promote maternal and child health could be most helpful for pregnant women with T1D and should be a research priority.
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.