Last updated August 22, 2026
Key finding
Central laboratory HbA1c remained lower in the CL group by 0.9% (10 mmol/mol [95% CI 0.2, 1.5; P = 0.009]).
This study investigated the effectiveness of hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery compared to standard insulin therapy in youth with type 1 diabetes, finding improved glycemic control.
Quick read
The essential study design details in one scan.
EvidenceScore™
Moderate
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Long-Term (1–5 y)
Risk of bias
Some Concerns
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Plain-language summary
A plain-language read of the study’s main message and where it applies.
Study focus
This study investigated the effectiveness of hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery compared to standard insulin therapy in youth with type 1 diabetes, finding improved glycemic control.
Improved glycemic control is crucial for youth with type 1 diabetes as it can reduce the risk of long-term complications. The findings suggest that hybrid closed-loop systems may offer a more effective management option, potentially leading to better health outcomes and quality of life for young patients.
The study may have limited generalizability due to specific population characteristics. The sample size and duration of follow-up may not capture long-term effects. Potential biases in self-reported data could affect outcome accuracy.
Published in
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Julia W, Charlotte KB, Janet MA, et al. Improved Glycemic Control with Hybrid Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery in Youth with Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2024;47(8):1441-1448. doi:10.2337/dc24-0360
The hybrid closed-loop group had a 0.9% lower HbA1c level (P = 0.009).
Time in target glucose range increased by 12 percentage points in the hybrid closed-loop group (P = 0.008).
There were 11 severe hypoglycemic events reported (6 in CL, 5 in control).
Evidence network
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
This study contributes evidence to Hybrid closed-loop system, Insulin therapy and Diabetic ketoacidosis, Fasting C-peptide levels, HbA1c, and 2 more.
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
Hybrid closed-loop system
Primary outcomes
Primary intervention
Primary outcomes
Intervention and outcome relationships this study adds to the evidence network.
Editorial context
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.
5
Related topics
10
Evidence pairs
1052
Related studies
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Save studies and evidence pages, organize your personal Evidence Tracker, and keep the research you care about in one place.
Primary evidence
Evidence relationship
Related evidence
Evidence relationship
Save evidence
Evidence relationship
Save evidence
Core evidence
The primary outcomes reported in this study.
Hybrid closed-loop system → Diabetic ketoacidosis
Hybrid closed-loop system → Diabetic ketoacidosis
Hybrid closed-loop system → Fasting C-peptide levels
Hybrid closed-loop system → Fasting C-peptide levels
Hybrid closed-loop system → Severe Hypoglycemic Events
Hybrid closed-loop system → Severe Hypoglycemic Events
Insulin therapy → Fasting C-peptide levels
Insulin therapy → Fasting C-peptide levels
Insulin therapy → Severe Hypoglycemic Events
Insulin therapy → Severe Hypoglycemic Events
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
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.
This study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.
Devices & Technology
Devices & Technology
Curated evidence collections and hubs this study is part of.
All studies measuring CGM Time in Range
Measures CGM Time in Range as a key outcome.
All studies on Insulin Delivery Systems
Contributes to Insulin Delivery Systems evidence base.
All studies measuring HbA1c
Measures HbA1c as a key outcome.
Latest published studies
Published within the last 2 years.
Jump to pre-filtered views in Evidence Explorer.
12 results
5 results
12 results
12 results
5 results
Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.
Insulin Delivery Systems may improve CGM Time in Range.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are generally consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
Time in range
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 86.0 | moderate positive | ConsistencyScore™ Generally Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 20 supporting studies with generally consistent results and a positive effect signal.
Limitations
Insulin Therapies may improve HbA1c.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
HbA1c
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 83.4 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 14 supporting studies with consistent results and a positive effect signal.
Limitations
Insulin Delivery Systems appears to improve HbA1c.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
HbA1c
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 84.2 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 14 supporting studies with consistent results and a positive effect signal.
Limitations
Insulin Therapies appears to improve CGM Time in Range.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
Time in range
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 81.8 | moderate positive | ConsistencyScore™ Generally Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 10 supporting studies with consistent results and a positive effect signal.
Limitations
Next steps
Choose a next path through related evidence topics, Evidence Explorer views, and research summaries.
Follow the topics this study contributes to.
Open broader Evidence Explorer views for this relationship.
Read related research summaries.
Focused on evidence, not advertising.
Your data is always protected.
New studies added every day.
