Skip to main content
. 2021 Aug 4;27(8):1471–1476. doi: 10.1038/s41591-021-01453-z

Table 1.

Comparison of primary and secondary outcomes between closed-loop and control periods

Closed-loop (n = 26) Control (n = 26) P value
Proportion of time spent at glucose level (%)
 5.6–10.0 mmol l−1 a 52.8 (12.5) 37.7 (20.5) <0.001
 3.9–10.0 mmol l−1 57.1 (14.3) 42.5 (24.7) 0.002
 >10.0 mmol l−1 42.6 (14.3) 56.6 (25.1) 0.003
 >20.0 mmol l−1 1.8 (2.4) 6.7 (10.7) 0.012
 <5.6 mmol l−1 3.2 (2.0, 7.0) 4.0 (0.9, 9.5) 0.87
 <3.9 mmol l−1 0.12 (0.02, 0.44) 0.17 (0.00, 1.11) 0.040
 <3.0 mmol l−1 0.00 (0.00, 0.03) 0.00 (0.00, 0.22) 0.047
Mean glucose (mmol l−1) 10.1 (1.3) 11.6 (2.8) 0.003
Standard deviation of glucose (mmol l−1) 3.2 (0.7) 3.6 (0.9) 0.021
CV of glucose (%) 31.7 (4.8) 31.5 (5.4) 0.87
Between days CV of glucose (%) 30.8 (3.4) 31.2 (5.8) 0.72
Total daily insulin dose (U kg−1) 0.34 (0.15, 0.54) 0.36 (0.19, 0.58) 0.37
Total daily insulin dose (U) 20.4 (9.2, 50.3) 32.2 (12.1, 54.4) 0.38
Sensor glucose data (h) 454 (450, 460) 452 (425, 454) 0.062
Time using sensor glucose (%) 95 (94, 96) 94 (90, 95) 0.062
Time using closed-loop (%) 93 (89, 94)

aPrimary endpoint.

Data presented as mean (s.d.) or median (interquartile range).

CV, coefficient of variation.

A two-sample t-test on paired differences was used to compare normally distributed variables and the Mann–Whitney–Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used for data that are not normally distributed. No allowance was made for multiplicity.