MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091746134 · doi:10.1186/1471-2431-14-183

The JDRF CCTN CGM TIME Trial: Timing of Initiation of continuous glucose Monitoring in Established pediatric type 1 diabetes: study protocol, recruitment and baseline characteristics

2014· article· en· W2091746134 on OpenAlexafffund
Margaret L. Lawson, Brenda Bradley, Karen McAssey, Cheril Clarson, Susan Kirsch, Farid H. Mahmud, Jacqueline R. Curtis, Christine Richardson, Jennilea Courtney, Tammy Cooper, Cynthia J Downie, Gopalan Rajamannar, Nicholas Barrowman

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pediatrics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsHospital for Sick ChildrenMarkham Stouffville HospitalLondon Health Sciences CentreJuvenile Diabetes Research FoundationMcMaster Children's HospitalChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioAgricultural Research Institute of OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesFedDev OntarioJuvenile Diabetes Research Foundation CanadaJuvenile Diabetes Research Foundation United States of America
KeywordsMedicineGlycemicRandomized controlled trialInsulin pumpType 1 diabetesType 2 diabetesContinuous glucose monitoringDiabetes mellitusPediatricsInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to improve glucose control in adults with type 1 diabetes. Effectiveness of CGM is directly linked with CGM adherence, which can be challenging to maintain in children and adolescents. We hypothesize that initiating CGM at the same time as starting insulin pump therapy in pump naïve children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes will result in greater CGM adherence and effectiveness compared to delaying CGM introduction by 6 months, and that this is related to greater readiness for making behaviour change at the time of pump initiation. METHODS/DESIGN: The CGM TIME Trial is a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Eligible children and adolescents (5-18 years) with established type 1 diabetes were randomized to simultaneous initiation of pump (Medtronic Veo©) and CGM (Enlite©) or to standard pump therapy with delayed CGM introduction. Primary outcomes are CGM adherence and hemoglobin A1C at 6 and 12 months post pump initiation. Secondary outcomes include glycemic variability, stage of readiness, and other patient-reported outcomes with follow-up to 24 months. 144 (95%) of the 152 eligible patients were enrolled and randomized. Allowing for 10% withdrawals, this will provide 93% power to detect a between group difference in CGM adherence and 86% power to detect a between group difference in hemoglobin A1C. Baseline characteristics were similar between the treatment groups. Analysis of 12 month primary outcomes will begin in September 2014. DISCUSSION: The CGM TIME Trial is the first study to examine the relationship between timing of CGM initiation, readiness for behaviour change, and subsequent CGM adherence in pump naïve children and adolescents. Its findings will advance our understanding of when and how to initiate CGM in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov NCT01295788. Registered 14 February 2011.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC PediatricsSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207