MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410996454 · doi:10.1155/pedi/8875203

Equity of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Children and Young People With Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review

2025· review· en· W4410996454 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. Dicks, Lucy McCann, Abraham Tolley, Alice Macdonald Barrell, Lucy Johnson, Isla Kuhn, John Ford

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Diabetes · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContinuous glucose monitoringType 1 diabetesEquity (law)Diabetes mellitusMEDLINEBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringType 2 diabetesPediatricsEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Socioeconomic status (SES) and ethnic inequalities in type 1 diabetes (T1D) outcomes are well‐established. There is concern that unequal access to technologies, including continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), may increase disparities. This systematic review summarises the evidence for inequalities in the prevalence of CGM use for children and young people (CYP) and outcomes for CGM users. Methods: Medline, Embase and Web of Science were searched for observational studies published between January 2000 and July 2023 which report CGM use stratified by any PROGRESS‐Plus criteria for T1D patients under 26. Reports based in low‐ or middle‐income countries, ≤500 participants or only reporting hybrid closed‐loop systems were excluded. Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients using CGM and HbA1c of CGM users. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Unadjusted odds ratios were calculated from the extracted summary data, though heterogeneity precluded meta‐analysis. The protocol was preregistered with PROSPERO (CRD42023438139). Results: Of the 3369 unique studies identified, 27 met the inclusion criteria. Thirty‐three percent were of ‘good’ or ‘very good’ quality. We found decreased CGM use and higher discontinuation for low SES, low education, publicly insured and minority ethnic, especially Black, CYP. These associations were generally robust to adjustment for other sociodemographic variables, suggesting an independent effect. Lower SES inequalities were seen in countries where CGM is reimbursed. Although low SES and minority ethnicity were associated with poorer outcomes in general, for CGM users there was no significant association between domains of disadvantage and higher HbA1c, excepting parental education. Conclusions: There are significant SES, ethnic and education inequalities in CGM use for CYP with T1D, particularly when reimbursement is limited. This inequity is contributing to inequalities in T1D outcomes. However, evidence suggests CYP benefit equally from CGM use, irrespective of ethnicity and SES. Increasing CGM funding and use is likely to reduce outcome inequalities.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.302 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric DiabetesSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207