Evidence Intelligence™
- EvidenceScore™
- Emerging
- Score 59 · Based on 1 study
- ImpactScore™
- 50
- Neutral
- ConsistencyScore™
- unclear
- Not enough independent studies
Supporting studies: Based on 1 study
Add to Evidence TrackerResumen de Investigación
Analyzed using Evidence Intelligence™
Automated insulin delivery improves glycemic control in type 2 diabetes
Última actualización 12 de julio de 2026
Key finding
Mean HbA1c decreased by 0.8% from a baseline of 8.0 ± 1.2% with AID.
This study evaluated the benefits of automated insulin delivery (AID) in adults with type 2 diabetes on GLP-1 receptor agonists, finding significant improvements in HbA1c and time-in-range.
Quick read
Study at a glance
The essential study design details in one scan.
EvidenceScore™
Moderate
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Medium-Term (3–12 mo)
Risk of bias
Some Concerns
Guarda investigacion, organiza estudios y vuelve a encontrar evidencia importante rapidamente.
Plain-language summary
What this paper says
A plain-language read of the study’s main message and where it applies.
Study focus
This study evaluated the benefits of automated insulin delivery (AID) in adults with type 2 diabetes on GLP-1 receptor agonists, finding significant improvements in HbA1c and time-in-range.
Clinical relevance
These findings are clinically significant as they suggest that automated insulin delivery can enhance glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes, potentially leading to better long-term health outcomes. Improved HbA1c levels and time-in-range may reduce the risk of diabetes-related complications, making AID a valuable option for patients on GLP-1 receptor agonists.
Keep in mind
The study did not assess long-term outcomes beyond 13 weeks. Sample size and demographic diversity were not specified. The effectiveness of AID compared to CGM remains unclear.
Published in
Referencia de la Revista
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Timothy EG, Dan R, Samina A, et al. The benefits of automated insulin delivery in adults with type 2 diabetes treated with GLP-1 receptor agonists. Diabetes Care. 2025;48(12):2154-2159. doi:10.2337/dc25-1753
Efectos Principales
Mean HbA1c decreased by 0.8% with AID (P = 0.001).
Time-in-range 70–180 mg/dL showed statistically significant improvements with AID.
Mean HbA1c decreased by 0.3% with CGM (P = 0.001).
Evidence network
How this study fits
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
Evidence Context
This study contributes evidence to Continuous glucose monitoring, Tighter glycemic control and Body weight, HbA1c, Time in range.
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
Continuous glucose monitoring
Primary outcomes
- Body weight
- HbA1c
- Time in range
Primary intervention
Primary outcomes
Evidence relationships
Intervention and outcome relationships this study adds to the evidence network.
5
Evidence pairs
5
Relationships
4
Evidence topics
contributes_evidence
Editorial context
Why this study matters
See why this paper is useful beyond its individual results.
Evidence network role
This section describes how the study fits into the current evidence network. It does not determine whether an intervention works on its own.
Moderate contributionModerate confidenceNetwork score: 72
4
Related topics
5
Evidence pairs
610
Related studies
High relevance in at least one topic
Why it is useful
- Contributes to 5 evidence relationships
- Includes primary outcome data
- Linked to 4 direct semantic evidence topics
Topic contributions
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Agrega evidencia relacionada a tu Evidence Tracker
Guarda estudios y paginas de evidencia, organiza tu Evidence Tracker y manten en un solo lugar la investigacion que te importa.
Evidencia principal
Relación de evidencia
Insulin Delivery Systems and HbA1c
Evidencia relacionada
Relación de evidencia
Glycemic Control Treatments and CGM Time in Range
Guardar evidencia
Relación de evidencia
Glycemic Control Treatments and HbA1c
Guardar evidencia
Core evidence
Study findings
The primary outcomes reported in this study.
Evidence Intelligence™
- EvidenceScore™
- 83
- Strong
- ImpactScore™
- 93
- Very Positive
- ConsistencyScore™
- 86
- consistent
Supporting studies: Based on 7 studies
Add to Evidence TrackerEvidence Intelligence™
- EvidenceScore™
- Emerging
- Score 59 · Based on 1 study
- ImpactScore™
- 50
- Neutral
- ConsistencyScore™
- unclear
- Not enough independent studies
Supporting studies: Based on 1 study
Add to Evidence TrackerEvidence Intelligence™
- EvidenceScore™
- Emerging
- Score 59 · Based on 1 study
- ImpactScore™
- 100
- Very Positive
- ConsistencyScore™
- unclear
- Not enough independent studies
Supporting studies: Based on 1 study
Add to Evidence TrackerEvidence Intelligence™
- EvidenceScore™
- Emerging
- Score 59 · Based on 1 study
- ImpactScore™
- 100
- Very Positive
- ConsistencyScore™
- unclear
- Not enough independent studies
Supporting studies: Based on 1 study
Add to Evidence TrackerEvidence Library
Build your evidence library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
La Evidencia Sugiere
- AID reduced HbA1c by 0.8% from a baseline of 8.0%.
- Time-in-range improved significantly with AID.
- No significant weight change was observed in either group.
A quién se aplica
- Adults with type 2 diabetes.
- Patients currently treated with GLP-1 receptor agonists.
Tener en Cuenta
- Results may not be generalizable to all populations with diabetes.
- Further studies are needed to evaluate long-term effects.
- Weight change findings were not statistically significant.
Entre Líneas
- The study did not assess long-term outcomes beyond 13 weeks.
- Sample size and demographic diversity were not specified.
- The effectiveness of AID compared to CGM remains unclear.
Evidence Library
Build your evidence library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Connected Evidence
Explore related studies, evidence collections, and research questions.
Relationships organized using the Dediabetes Evidence Intelligence™ framework.
This study contributes to evidence on Insulin Delivery Systems and CGM Time in Range, Insulin Delivery Systems and HbA1c.
Relaciones de evidencia relacionadas
Explore in Evidence ExplorerThis study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.
Devices & Technology
Insulin Delivery Systems → CGM Time in Range
Devices & Technology
Evidence Intelligence™
- EvidenceScore™
- 83
- Strong
- ImpactScore™
- 83
- Positive
- ConsistencyScore™
- 83
- consistent
Supporting studies: Based on 6 studies
View evidenceDevices & Technology
Insulin Delivery Systems → HbA1c
Devices & Technology
Evidence Intelligence™
- EvidenceScore™
- 83
- Strong
- ImpactScore™
- 93
- Very Positive
- ConsistencyScore™
- 86
- consistent
Supporting studies: Based on 7 studies
View evidenceDevices & Technology
Insulin Delivery Systems → Body Weight
Devices & Technology
Evidence Intelligence™
- EvidenceScore™
- Emerging
- Score 59 · Based on 1 study
- ImpactScore™
- 50
- Neutral
- ConsistencyScore™
- unclear
- Not enough independent studies
Supporting studies: Based on 1 study
View evidenceIncluido en estas colecciones de evidencia
Curated evidence collections and hubs this study is part of.
HbA1c Evidence Hub
All studies measuring HbA1c
7 studies
outcome_hubMeasures HbA1c as a key outcome.
CGM Time in Range Evidence Hub
All studies measuring CGM Time in Range
6 studies
outcome_hubMeasures CGM Time in Range as a key outcome.
Insulin Delivery Systems Evidence Hub
All studies on Insulin Delivery Systems
6 studies
intervention_hubContributes to Insulin Delivery Systems evidence base.
Body Weight Evidence Hub
All studies measuring Body Weight
1 studies
outcome_hubMeasures Body Weight as a key outcome.
Recent Diabetes Research
Latest published studies
recency_collection
Published within the last 2 years.
Explora más en Evidence Explorer
Jump to pre-filtered views in Evidence Explorer.
All studies on Continuous glucose monitoring and Time in range
Intervention: Continuous glucose monitoringOutcome: Time in range
6 results
All studies on Continuous glucose monitoring and HbA1c
Intervention: Continuous glucose monitoringOutcome: HbA1c
7 results
All studies on Continuous glucose monitoring
Intervention: Continuous glucose monitoring
6 results
All studies measuring Time in range
Outcome: Time in range
6 results
All studies measuring HbA1c
Outcome: HbA1c
7 results
Questions answered by this study
Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.
Does Insulin Delivery Systems improve HbA1c?
Strong Evidence
Insulin Delivery Systems appears to improve HbA1c.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
- 1
HbA1c
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 83.3 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 13 supporting studies with consistent results and a positive effect signal.
Limitations
- Population details are unavailable.
Does Glycemic Control Treatments improve cgm time in range?
Moderate Evidence
Glycemic Control Treatments appears to improve CGM Time in Range.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
- 1
Time in range
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a small number of supporting studies and should be interpreted cautiously.
Limitations
- Only a small number of supporting studies are available.
- Population details are unavailable.
Does Glycemic Control Treatments improve HbA1c?
Moderate Evidence
Glycemic Control Treatments appears to improve HbA1c.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
- 1
HbA1c
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a small number of supporting studies and should be interpreted cautiously.
Limitations
- Only a small number of supporting studies are available.
- Population details are unavailable.
Does Glycemic Control Treatments affect body weight?
Emerging Evidence
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Glycemic Control Treatments for Body Weight.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
- 1
Body weight
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
- Only one supporting study is available.
- Consistency cannot yet be determined.
- Population details are unavailable.
Next steps
Continue your research
Choose a next path through related evidence topics, Evidence Explorer views, and research summaries.
Evidence topics
Follow the topics this study contributes to.
Explore in Evidence Explorer
Open broader Evidence Explorer views for this relationship.
Related research
Read related research summaries.
Newer diabetes drugs show stronger weight and blood sugar benefits in prediabetesi3 CGM shows reliable performance for diabetes managementDexcom ONE use significantly reduces HbA1c in diabetes patients.Education Model Improves Glycemic Control in Type 1 DiabetesTelemedicine improves glucose control in nursing home residents with diabetes.
No ads. No tracking.
Focused on evidence, not advertising.
Secure & private
Your data is always protected.
Always up to date
New studies added every day.