Cited by 40Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes and associated disorders

Day‐to‐day Variation of Insulin Sensitivity in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: Role of Gender and Menstrual Cycle

Moberg, E., Kollind, M., Lins, P‐E., Adamson, U.·1995·Diabetic Medicine

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to compare the day-to-day variations of the insulin sensitivity in male and female Type 1 diabetic patients and to assess the insulin sensitivity in the follicular and luteal phases of the menstrual cycle. Ten male and 20 female Type 1 diabetic patients participated in the study. The insulin sensitivity was assessed by the insulin (0.4 mU kg-1 min-1)-glucose/(4.5 mg kg-1 min-1)-infusion test (IGIT). In 5 of the female patients, a simultaneous i.v. influsion of somatostatin (100 micrograms h-1) was given (SIGIT). Each patient was studied twice, with 2 weeks separating the two tests. The day-to-day variations of the insulin sensitivity were almost identical in the male and female patients, the coefficients of variation being 13% in both groups. In 15 of the female patients, ovulation occurred. In these women, the mean blood-glucose levels between 120 and 240 min after the onset of the IGIT/SIGIT were 9.8 +/- 1.1 mmol l-1 in the follicular phase and 10.3 +/- 1.0 mmol l-1 in the luteal phase, n.s. (95% confidence interval for the difference (luteal-follicular) -0.8-1.9 mmol l-1). Although the present study cannot exclude minor changes of insulin sensitivity during the menstrual cycle, our results suggest that the changes of the metabolic control during the menstrual cycle, experienced by many women with Type 1 diabetes, are largely attributable to mechanisms other than variations of insulin sensitivity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1464-5491.1995.tb00462.x

Cites

6 of 6 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
Moberg, E., Kollind, M., Lins, P., & Adamson, U.
Affiliations
Danderyds sjukhus (SE)
Corresponding author
Moberg, E.
Venue
Diabetic Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1995-03
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
224-228
ISSN
  • 0742-3071 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5491
OpenAlex
W2048679698
Cited by
40
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Diabetic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Vetenskapsrådet
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Diabetes and associated disorders
Keywords
type 1 diabetes, insulin sensitivity, day-to-day variability, menstrual cycle, follicular phase, luteal phase, gender differences, somatostatin, blood glucose, metabolic control
MeSH terms
Adult, Blood Glucose, C-Peptide, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Estradiol, Female, Follicular Phase, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Insulin, Luteal Phase, Male, Menstrual Cycle, Progesterone, Sex Characteristics, Reproducibility of Results, Cohort Studies

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