Cited by 75Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsPancreatic function and diabetes

Menstrual Cycle Effects on Insulin Sensitivity in Women with Type 1 Diabetes: A Pilot Study

Trout, Kimberly K., Rickels, Michael R., Schutta, Mark H., Petrova, Maja, Freeman, Ellen W., Tkacs, Nancy C., Teff, Karen L.·2007·Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics

Abstract

Background Many women complain of difficulty maintaining euglycemia during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle. This pilot study's objective was to evaluate possible differences in insulin sensitivity between follicular and luteal phases in women with type 1 diabetes. Methods Women using insulin infusion pumps (n = 5, mean age 29.2 +/- 10.9 years, mean body mass index 24 +/- 1.8 kg/m(2)) underwent frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance tests during each cycle phase. Insulin sensitivity and glucose effectiveness were determined by Minimal Model analysis. Results Non-insulin-mediated glucose disposal increased during the luteal phase (0.009 +/- 0.004 min(1)) versus the follicular phase (0.005 +/- 0.003 min(1)) (P Conclusions Elevated blood glucose during the luteal phase may increase insulin-independent glucose disposal. Some individuals appear more responsive to menstrual cycle effects on insulin sensitivity. Women should be encouraged to use available self-monitoring technology to identify possible cyclical variations in blood glucose that might require clinician review and insulin dosage adjustments.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/dia.2006.0004

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Trout, K. K., Rickels, M. R., Schutta, M. H., Petrova, M., Freeman, E. W., Tkacs, N. C., & Teff, K. L.
Affiliations
  • Monell Chemical Senses Center (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Venue
Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics
Published
2007-04
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
176-182
ISSN
  • 1520-9156 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-8593
OpenAlex
W2001657917
Cited by
75
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5k12rr017625-02)
  • National Institute of Nursing Research (F31NR008179, 1-F31-NR008179)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (P30 DK 19525, P30DK019525)
  • National Center for Research Resources (K12-RR-017625, M01-RR-00040, M01RR000040)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pancreatic function and diabetes
Keywords
menstrual cycle, insulin sensitivity, type 1 diabetes, luteal phase, follicular phase, insulin pump, glucose effectiveness, normoglycemia, self-monitoring of blood glucose, insulin dose adjustment
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Female, Glucose Tolerance Test, Humans, Insulin Infusion Systems, Menstrual Cycle, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring, Body Mass Index

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review