Performance of an automated insulin-glucagon delivery system versus automated insulin delivery system during challenging inpatient conditions. A single-blind randomised controlled crossover trial

What Was Tested

This randomized controlled trial paper looks at Glucagon.

Who Took Part

According to the abstract, 13 participants were involved.

By PubMed's age tags, the people studied were adults and middle-aged adults, both men and women.

In a 33-h, randomised, crossover, inpatient study, 13 participants with type 1 diabetes used the DiaCon system in AIGD and AID modes.

How the Study Was Run

The researchers set it up as a randomized, single-blind and crossover study.

Random assignment meant chance, not the researchers, decided who got Glucagon and who got the comparison, which limits bias.

In this single-blind Glucagon study one party knew the assignments and the other did not.

In the crossover set-up each of the participants took both Glucagon and the comparison in turn, acting as their own control.

What Was Measured

The subject headings attached to it are Blood Glucose, Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Glucagon, Hypoglycemia, Hypoglycemic Agents and Inpatients.

Author keywords: continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), effectiveness, glycaemic control, insulin pump, therapy and type 1 diabetes.

What This Means in Plain Language

The paper is a randomized, single-blind and crossover study of Glucagon in 13 participants.

With fewer than 40 people, it is a small study, so it is better read as an early signal for further research than as a settled answer.

Its findings take up roughly 6 sentences of the abstract and are left out here on purpose; the source paper is the place to read them.

The publication is from 2026 (Diabetes, obesity & metabolism), a journal based in England.

More context: the Glucagon compound page, all human trials.