Cited by 373Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes and associated disordersDiabetes Management and Education

A randomized, prospective trial comparing the efficacy of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion with multiple daily injections using insulin glargine

Open access
Doyle (Boland), Elizabeth A., Weinzimer, Stuart A., Steffen, Amy T., Ahern, Jo Ann H., Vincent, Miranda, Tamborlane, William V.·2004·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE—The efficacy of the insulin analogs now available for multiple daily injection (MDI) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy in type 1 diabetes has not yet been established in pediatric patients. Our principal aim in this short-term study was to compare the efficacy of CSII to MDI with glargine in lowering HbA1c levels in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Thirty-two youth with type 1 diabetes (age 8–21 years) were randomly assigned to receive either MDI treatment with once-daily glargine and premeal/snack insulin aspart or CSII with insulin aspart. Dose titration in both groups was based on home self-monitored blood glucose measurements and monthly HbA1c. HbA1c, total daily insulin dose (TDD), self-monitored blood glucose readings, and adverse events were compared after 16 weeks of therapy. RESULTS—While there was no significant change in the glargine group (HbA1c 8.2% at baseline vs. 8.1% at 16 weeks), youth randomized to CSII had a sharp reduction in HbA1c levels, from 8.1 to 7.2% after 16 weeks of therapy (P < 0.02 vs. baseline and <0.05 vs. glargine group). TDD was unchanged in the glargine group, but significantly dropped with CSII (1.4 units/kg at baseline vs. 0.9 units/kg at 16 weeks, P < 0.01). Both groups had similar basal doses and insulin-to-carbohydrate ratios. Fasting self-monitored blood glucose was similar in both groups, but lunch, dinner, and bedtime readings were significantly lower in the CSII group (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS—Lower HbA1c and premeal glucose levels were more achievable in this short-term study with CSII than with glargine-based MDI treatment. CSII is an efficacious treatment to improve metabolic control in youth with type 1 diabetes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/diacare.27.7.1554

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Randomized controlled trials comparing insulin pumps and multiple daily injections with rapid-acting insulin analogs demonstrated a modest improvement in A1C levels in participants on insulin pump therapy.

    “However, RCTs that compared insulin pumps and MDI with rapidacting insulin analogs demonstrated a modest improvement in A1C levels in participants on insulin pump therapy (178,179).”

    From 7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2025 (2025) · cites this paper as [178]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Doyle (Boland), E. A., Weinzimer, S. A., Steffen, A. T., Ahern, J. A. H., Vincent, M., & Tamborlane, W. V.
Affiliations
  • From the Department of Pediatrics and the Children’s Clinical Research Center, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
  • Yale University (US)
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2004-07-01
Volume
27
Issue
7
Pages
1554-1558
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2138976255
Cited by
373
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 23
FWCI
17.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Yale University
  • Novo Nordisk
  • National Institutes of Health (5u01hd037251-05)
  • National Center for Research Resources (RR06022)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD 37251)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Diabetes and associated disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
type 1 diabetes, insulin pump therapy, multiple daily insulin injections, insulin glargine, insulin aspart, glycemic control, HbA1c, total daily insulin dose, self-monitoring of blood glucose, pediatric diabetes, adolescents
MeSH terms
Insulin Glargine, Adolescent, Adult, Child, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Drug Administration Schedule, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Injections, Subcutaneous, Insulin, Insulin Infusion Systems, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring, Patient Selection, Postprandial Period, Insulin, Long-Acting

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