Research and articles

Do you want to take part in diabetes research in the UK?
Check out this JDRF tool.

Many of the articles listed here are linked to an abstract of the full article. It may be useful to print the abstract and show your diabetes care team so that they can look up the full article.

Diabetes technology use in the UK

2018 – National Paediatric Diabetes Audit 2016-17
– Pump use in children & young people in England & Wales continues to rise; now 32.2%
– Ages 0-4 years 45.7% use pumps, 15-19 years 27% use pumps

2018 – National Diabetes Insulin Pump Audit 2016-17
– Pump use in adults in England 15.6%, Wales 6.7%

2017 – National Diabetes Audit Insulin Pump Report 2015-16
– Pump use in adults in England 15.3%, Wales 5.8%

2017 – National Paediatric Diabetes Audit 2015-16
– Pump use in children & young people in England & Wales 28.1%

2015 – UK service level audit of insulin pump therapy in paediatrics use in UK
– Pump use in children & young people in UK 19%

2013 – Insulin pump audit – service level data
– Pump use in adults in UK 6%

2011 – Insulin Pump Audit – Findings for England
– Pump use in adults >2%, children & young people >8%

2011 – Adding Value – The Economic and Societal benefits of Medical Technology

2010 – Pump Action. A Review of Insulin Pump Uptake and NICE Guidance in English Primay Care Trusts (PCTs)
– Pump use in England 3.7%

Insulin pump therapy/CSII

2017 – Medtronic, OmniPod, Roche and Animas pumps compared – they are equally effective at reducing HbA1c  – Leelarantha et al

2017 – Relative effectiveness of insulin pump treatment over multiple daily injections and structured education during flexible intensive insulin treatment for type 1 diabetes: cluster randomised trial (REPOSE) – Heller et al

2014 – Variations in the quality and sustainability of long-term glycemic control with CSII – Nixon et al

2014 – Cross-sectional survey and retrospective analysis of a large cohort of adults with type 1 diabetes with long-term CSII treatment – Joubert et al

2013 – Experiences of CSII in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes during delivery

2013 – Long-term metabolic effects of CSII therapy in type 1 diabetes

2011 – JDRF Type 1 Discovery magazine, Issue 56 Summer 2011

2011 – Use of bolus calculator feature associated with better glucose control – Cukierman-Yaffe et al

2011 – Journal of Diabetes Nursing – Animal insulin in pumps

2001 – British Medical Journal – CSII – Pickup & Keen

1985 – British Medical Journal – Pro’s and Con’s of using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion

Insulin pump therapy in children & young people

2013 – Disordered eating behaviours in youth with type 1 diabetes: prospective pilot assessment following initiation of IPT

2013 Long-term outcome of insulin pump therapy in children with type 1 diabetes assessed in a large population-based case-control study – Johnson et al

JDRF website – Peter Hindmarsh – I believe kids under 5 should be on a pump

2006 – Pediatrics journal – CSII in Children Aged 2 to 7

2006 – Journal of D Nursing – Glycaemic Control in Children

Insulin pump therapy & type 2 diabetes

2014 – CSII compared with MDI: OpT2mise – Reznik et al

2010 – Efficacy of CSII in type 2 diabetes – Reznik et al

2010 – Insulin pump therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes safely improved glycaemic control using a simple insulin dosing regimen – Edelman et al

2010 – Using insulin pump therapy in poorly controlled type 2 diabetes – Wolff-McDonagh et al

2010 – Insulin pump use in Type 2 diabetes – meta-analysis

Smart glucose meters

2016 – Effects of advanced carbohydrate counting guided by an automated bolus calculator in Type 1 diabetes mellitus (StenoABC) – Hommel et al

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)

2017 – International Consensus on use of CGM (including real time and intermittent [Flash]) – Danne et al

2017 – Continuous glucose monitoring in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes (CONCEPTT): a multicentre international randomised controlled trial – Feig et al
Interpretation: Use of CGM during pregnancy in patients with type 1 diabetes is associated with improved neonatal outcomes, which are likely to be attributed to reduced exposure to maternal hyperglycaemia. CGM should be offered to all pregnant women with type 1 diabetes using intensive insulin therapy. This study is the first to indicate potential for improvements in non-glycaemic health outcomes from CGM use.

2017 – Is Continuous Glucose Monitoring Underappreciated in the UK? Parkin et al (includes survey on NHS funding vs self funding

2017 – An Economic Evaluation of Continuous Glucose Monitoring for People with Type 1 Diabetes and Impaired Awareness of Hypoglycaemia within North West London Clinical Commissioning Groups in England – Chaugule et al

2017 – Effect of Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Glycemic Control in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Injections: The DIAMOND Randomized Clinical Trial – DIaMonD study group

2017 – Continuous Glucose Monitoring vs Conventional Therapy for Glycemic Control in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Treated With Multiple Daily Insulin Injections: The GOLD Randomized Clinical Trial – Lind et al

2014 – Real-time CGM significantly reduces severe hypoglycaemia in hypoglycaemia-unaware patients with T1D – Choudhary et al

2014 – Parental sleep quality and continuous glucose monitoring system use in children with T1D – Landau et al

2014 – A Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Three CGMs – Damiano et al

2013 – The role of CGM in the care of children with type 1 diabetes – Larson & Pinsker

2012 – Use and efficacy of CGM with CSII: SWITCH study – Battelino

2011 – Glycaemic control in type 1, SMBG vs CGM meta analysis – Pickup

2011 – Effect of CGM on hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes – Battelino et al

2011 – Optimal use of short-term CGM to assess long-term glycemic control – Xing et al

2011 – Prolonged use of CGM in toddlers – Tsalikian et al

2009 – Reducing glycaemic variability in type 1 diabetes self-management with CGM

2007 – Journal of Pediatrics – Sensor Augmented Pumps

2007 – Journal of D Science & Technology -Basal tweaking with CGM

2009 – Factors predictive of use and of benefit from continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes

2009 – JDRF study – Sustained benefit of continuous glucose monitoring on A1c, glucose profiles, and hypoglycaemia in adults with type 1 diabetes

Flash glucose monitoring (Libre)

2018 – Cost calculation for a flash glucose monitoring system for UK adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus receiving intensive insulin treatment – Hellmund et al

2017 – Use of Flash Glucose Sensing to replace blood glucose monitoring in insulin-treated type 2 – Haak et al

2017 – A Multicenter Evaluation of the Performance and Usability of a Novel Glucose Monitoring System in Chinese Adults With Diabetes – Ji et al

2017 – Flash Glucose-Sensing Technology as a Replacement for Blood Glucose Monitoring for the Management of Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes  – Haak et al

2017 – An alternative sensor-based method for glucose monitoring in children and young people with diabetes – BMJ or PubMed here – Edge et al

2016 – Novel glucose-sensing technology & hypoglycaemia – Bolinder et al

2015 – The Performance and Usability of a Factory-Calibrated Flash Glucose Monitoring System – Bailey et al

Sensor augmented pump therapy (SAP) and closing the loop

Artificial pancreas clinical trial database

JDRF Research homepage

2018 – Artificial pancreas treatment for outpatients with type 1 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis – Bekiari, Horvorka et al
Conclusions: Artificial pancreas systems are an efficacious and safe approach for treating outpatients with type 1 diabetes. The main limitations of current research evidence on artificial pancreas systems are related to inconsistency in outcome reporting, small sample size, and short follow-up duration of individual trials.

2016 – Efficacy of an Overnight Predictive Low-Glucose Suspend System in Relation to Hypoglycemia Risk Factors in Youth and Adults With Type 1 Diabetes – Calhoun et al

2015 – Retrospective analysis of the real-world use of the threshold suspend feature of sensor-augmented insulin pumps – Agrawal et al

2014 – Clinical evaluation of an automated artificial pancreas using zone-model predictive control and health monitoring system – Harvey et al

2014 – Overnight closed-loop insulin delivery in young people with T1D: a free-living, randomized clinical trial – Hovorka et al

2014 – Night glucose control with MD-Logic artificial pancreas in home setting: a single, blind, randomized, crossover trial – interim analysis – Nimri et al

2014 – Quantitative estimation of insulin sensitivity in type 1 diabetic subjects wearing SAP – Schiavon et al

2014 – The effects of lowering nighttime and breakfast glucose levels with SAP on HbA1c – Maahs et al

2014 – Feasibility study of a bio-inspired artificial pancreas – Reddy et al

2013 – Day and night closed-loop control in adults with T1D: a comparison of two closed-loop algorithms driving CSII versus patient self-management – Luijf et al

2013 – Effect of SAP and automated insulin suspension vs standard insulin pump therapy on hypoglycaemia in patients with T1D – Ly et al

2013 – Feasibility of adjacent insulin infusion and CGM via the Medtronic Combo-Set (prototype)

2012 – Sensor augmented pump therapy from onset of T1 – follow up study

2011 – Use of integrated real-time CGM/insulin pump system in children and adolescents; 3 year follow up – Scaramuzza et al

2011 – BMJ – Overnight closed loop reduces hypoglycaemia in type 1 adults

2010 – Effectiveness of sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy in type 1 diabetes

2011 – Insulin Pump Therapy With Automated Insulin Suspension in Response to Hypoglycemia

2010 – Prevention of nocturnal hypoglycaemia using predictive alarm algorithms and insulin pump suspension


2018 – Hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes: technological treatments, their limitations and the place of psychology – Ariel & Choudhary
Abstract: Advances in technology allowing improved insulin delivery and glucose monitoring can significantly reduce the burden of hypoglycaemia when used appropriately. However, limitations of the current technology, and the skills, commitment and motivation required to use them, mean that it does not work for all people. Education and informed professional support are key to success. In the context of problematic hypoglycaemia, data suggest that newer technology has lower efficacy and uptake in those with most need. Identifying the causes of hypoglycaemia and understanding some of the underlying behavioural drivers may prove useful and psycho-educational strategies may be effective in selected individuals. Ultimately, as in many spheres of medicine, successful management of problematic hypoglycaemia depends upon matching the right treatment to the right individual.

2017 – Who should be considered for islet cell transplantation? – Orthonos & Choudhary

2013 – Spreading the word on islet transplants – Balance magazine, & Diabetes UK

2005/06 INPUT Newsletter Pages 1-4

2005/06 INPUT Newsletter Pages 5-8

2005/06 INPUT Newsletter Pages 9-12

INPUT Newsletter 2003