The diabEAT Study: Insulin dElivery Technologies And eaTing Behaviours in People With Type 1 Diabetes
NCT ID: NCT07348432
Last Updated: 2026-01-16
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
RECRUITING
106 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2024-07-29
2026-05-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Eating Disturbances in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Initiating Insulin Therapy
NCT07151924
Impact of Dietary Knowledge Related to Functional Insulin Therapy in Type 1 Diabetes on the Risk of Eating Disorders
NCT07021456
Develop and Validate a Self-Administered Instrument That Will Screen for Eating Disorder Symptoms in Persons Aged 12 and Older With Type 1 Diabetes.
NCT00948311
Carbohydrates Under Target for Type 1 Diabetes Management
NCT04758858
Treatment of Latent Autoimmune Diabetes of the Adult
NCT01140438
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Objectives:
1. Determine the relationship between AID and eating behaviours
2. Determine the carbohydrate counting inaccuracy threshold to maintain glycemic stability and understand whether AID use modifies this relationship.
Methods: This is an observational cross-section analysis of people with type 1 diabetes.
Eligibility criteria included: those living with type 1 diabetes for more than 1 year, using at least 2 insulin injections per day or using an insulin pump, who were living in Canada, 12 years of age or older, and using their current insulin delivery system for 3 months or more.
Participants are excluded if they were pregnant/currently breastfeeding and did not speak English or French.
Demographic, and diabetes-related information (including AID use), are determined through an initial questionnaire, which takes about 15 minutes to complete. Disordered eating behaviours were determined through validated questionnaires. The Three Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQR-21) identified behaviours such as cognitive restraint (score ranged from 6 to 24), emotional eating (score ranged from 6 to 24), and uncontrolled eating (score ranged from 9 to 36). The Diabetes Eating Problem Survey Revised (DEPS-R) identified DEBs specific to diabetes (score ranged from 0 to 80 with \> 20 representing those at risk of DEB). The Teruel Orthorexia Scale (TOS) identified orthorexia nervosa behaviours defined as an obsession with healthy eating which may lead to emotional impairments (score ranged from 0 to 24).
Dietary intake information will be collected through a 4 day picture food journal (3 weekdays and 1 weekend) application called Keenoa and analyzed by a Registered Dietitian.
Glycemic outcomes such as glucose time in range (TIR), which measures the amount of time glucose levels are between 3.9-10.0mmol/L, and Coefficient Variation, were reported through a 14 day CGM report (Clarity, Dexcom, Medtronic).
Physical activity will be measured through an Actigraph GT3X for 8 days.
Descriptive analysis will be completed at enrollment, to determine the mean (SD) socio-demographic information, eating behaviour scores and dietary intake (macro/micronutrient profile) by insulin delivery system (AID and injections/insulin pumps).
Multivariate linear regression will be used to determine the relationship between AID compared to injections/insulin pumps and disordered eating behaviour scores.
Secondly, carbohydrate counting inaccuracy will be determined by comparing participant reported carbohydrate counts measured in mean (SD) grams per meal to RD measured carbohydrate counts by analyzing 4-day dietary reports, as generated by Keenoa.
Carbohydrate counting inaccuracy threshold will be determined through multivariate linear regression by exploring the relationship between percent carbohydrate counting inaccuracy and % of glucose Time in Range and Coefficient Variation. Type of insulin delivery will be used as an effect modifier to determine how this relationship is modified by AID and injections/insulin pumps.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
CROSS_SECTIONAL
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Automated Insulin Delivery (AID) Systems
AID automatically adjusts insulin delivery by using continuously measured blood glucose levels. AID use will be determined through the initial questionnaire through the following questions:
Do you currently use the pump as an automated insulin delivery system (connected to a CGM with automated insulin adjustments)? Yes, a commercial AID with control IQ (Tandem) or SmartGuard (Medtronic) Yes, a non-commercial open-source do-it yourself AID (e.g., Loop) No, they use it as a manual (non-automated) pump or with a suspend on low functionality (e.g., Basal IQ) I prefer not to answer I don't know
The type of AID system (hybrid, advanced hybrid, etc.) will also be confirmed.
The exposure variable will be coded as a binary-categorical variable of AID use (yes or no) with no representing all other non-AID insulin pumps or injections.
Carbohydrate Counting Inaccuracy Percentage
Carbohydrate counting inaccuracy: will be determined by subtracting the estimated carbohydrates (by participant) by the actual amount of carbohydrate (through diet analysis) divided by the actual amount of carbohydrate, multiplied by 100, to determined the percentage. Estimated carbohydrate counts will be entered at each meal and snack by the participant in a daily log provided to the participant. Carbohydrate amounts will be collected through a 4-day food diary through the phone application Keenoa (carb count from the app will be blinded to the participant), and reviewed by a research assistant with education in dietetics.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Living in Canada
* Living with type 1 diabetes for more than 1 year
* Using at least 2 insulin injections per day or using an insulin pump
* Using current insulin delivery system for 3 months or more
Exclusion Criteria
* Don't speak French or English
* Does not have a smart phone (to download applications)
12 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Laval University
OTHER
Université de Montréal
OTHER
University of Windsor
OTHER
McGill University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Anne-Sophie Brazeau
Associate Professor
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Anne-Sophie Brazeau, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
McGill University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
McGill University
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Anne-Sophie Brazeau, PhD
Role: primary
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Boughton CK, Hovorka R. Automated Insulin Delivery in Adults. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 2020 Mar;49(1):167-178. doi: 10.1016/j.ecl.2019.10.007. Epub 2019 Dec 16.
Aiello EM, Deshpande S, Ozaslan B, Wolkowicz KL, Dassau E, Pinsker JE, Doyle FJ. Review of Automated Insulin Delivery Systems for Individuals with Type 1 Diabetes: Tailored Solutions for Subpopulations. Curr Opin Biomed Eng. 2021 Sep;19:100312. doi: 10.1016/j.cobme.2021.100312. Epub 2021 Jun 18.
Bell KJ, Barclay AW, Petocz P, Colagiuri S, Brand-Miller JC. Efficacy of carbohydrate counting in type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2014 Feb;2(2):133-40. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(13)70144-X. Epub 2013 Oct 25.
Brazeau AS, Mircescu H, Desjardins K, Leroux C, Strychar I, Ekoe JM, Rabasa-Lhoret R. Carbohydrate counting accuracy and blood glucose variability in adults with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2013 Jan;99(1):19-23. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2012.10.024. Epub 2012 Nov 10.
Bryant EJ, Thivel D, Chaput JP, Drapeau V, Blundell JE, King NA. Development and validation of the Child Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire (CTFEQr17). Public Health Nutr. 2018 Oct;21(14):2558-2567. doi: 10.1017/S1368980018001210. Epub 2018 May 15.
Builes-Montano CE, Ortiz-Cano NA, Ramirez-Rincon A, Rojas-Henao NA. Efficacy and safety of carbohydrate counting versus other forms of dietary advice in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2022 Dec;35(6):1030-1042. doi: 10.1111/jhn.13017. Epub 2022 May 11.
Cappelleri JC, Bushmakin AG, Gerber RA, Leidy NK, Sexton CC, Lowe MR, Karlsson J. Psychometric analysis of the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire-R21: results from a large diverse sample of obese and non-obese participants. Int J Obes (Lond). 2009 Jun;33(6):611-20. doi: 10.1038/ijo.2009.74. Epub 2009 Apr 28.
Castle JR, El Youssef J, Wilson LM, Reddy R, Resalat N, Branigan D, Ramsey K, Leitschuh J, Rajhbeharrysingh U, Senf B, Sugerman SM, Gabo V, Jacobs PG. Randomized Outpatient Trial of Single- and Dual-Hormone Closed-Loop Systems That Adapt to Exercise Using Wearable Sensors. Diabetes Care. 2018 Jul;41(7):1471-1477. doi: 10.2337/dc18-0228. Epub 2018 May 11.
Dong D, Jackson T, Wang Y, Chen H. Spontaneous regional brain activity links restrained eating to later weight gain among young women. Biol Psychol. 2015 Jul;109:176-83. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2015.05.003. Epub 2015 May 21.
Frappier I, Jacob R, Panahi S, Larose D, Bryant EJ, Chaput JP, Thivel D, Drapeau V. Translation and validation of the Child Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire (CTFEQr17) in French-speaking Canadian children and adolescents. Public Health Nutr. 2022 Mar;25(3):543-553. doi: 10.1017/S136898002100392X. Epub 2021 Sep 10.
Fuchs J, Hovorka R. Closed-loop control in insulin pumps for type-1 diabetes mellitus: safety and efficacy. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2020 Jul;17(7):707-720. doi: 10.1080/17434440.2020.1784724. Epub 2020 Jul 3.
Gagnon C, Aimé A, Bélanger C. French Validation of the Diabetes Eating Problem Survey-Revised (DEPS-R). Can J Diabetes. 2013;37(1):60. doi:10.1016/j.jcjd.2013.03.009
Hays NP, Roberts SB. Aspects of eating behaviors "disinhibition" and "restraint" are related to weight gain and BMI in women. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2008 Jan;16(1):52-8. doi: 10.1038/oby.2007.12.
Hanlan ME, Griffith J, Patel N, Jaser SS. Eating Disorders and Disordered Eating in Type 1 Diabetes: Prevalence, Screening, and Treatment Options. Curr Diab Rep. 2013 Sep 12:10.1007/s11892-013-0418-4. doi: 10.1007/s11892-013-0418-4. Online ahead of print.
Kahkoska AR, Mayer-Davis EJ, Hood KK, Maahs DM, Burger KS. Behavioural implications of traditional treatment and closed-loop automated insulin delivery systems in Type 1 diabetes: applying a cognitive restraint theory framework. Diabet Med. 2017 Nov;34(11):1500-1507. doi: 10.1111/dme.13407. Epub 2017 Sep 11.
Keane S, Clarke M, Murphy M, McGrath D, Smith D, Farrelly N, MacHale S. Disordered eating behaviour in young adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus. J Eat Disord. 2018 May 2;6:9. doi: 10.1186/s40337-018-0194-2. eCollection 2018.
Kaur RJ, Deshpande S, Pinsker JE, Gilliam WP, McCrady-Spitzer S, Zaniletti I, Desjardins D, Church MM, Doyle Iii FJ, Kremers WK, Dassau E, Kudva YC. Outpatient Randomized Crossover Automated Insulin Delivery Versus Conventional Therapy with Induced Stress Challenges. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2022 May;24(5):338-349. doi: 10.1089/dia.2021.0436. Epub 2022 Apr 25.
Lawton J, Blackburn M, Rankin D, Allen J, Campbell F, Leelarathna L, Tauschmann M, Thabit H, Wilinska ME, Hovorka R; APCam11 Consortium. The impact of using a closed-loop system on food choices and eating practices among people with Type 1 diabetes: a qualitative study involving adults, teenagers and parents. Diabet Med. 2019 Jun;36(6):753-760. doi: 10.1111/dme.13887. Epub 2019 Jan 29.
Maiano C, Aime A, Almenara CA, Gagnon C, Barrada JR. Psychometric properties of the Teruel Orthorexia Scale (TOS) among a French-Canadian adult sample. Eat Weight Disord. 2022 Dec;27(8):3457-3467. doi: 10.1007/s40519-022-01482-8. Epub 2022 Sep 30.
Markowitz JT, Alleyn CA, Phillips R, Muir A, Young-Hyman D, Laffel LM. Disordered eating behaviors in youth with type 1 diabetes: prospective pilot assessment following initiation of insulin pump therapy. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013 May;15(5):428-33. doi: 10.1089/dia.2013.0008. Epub 2013 Apr 3.
Migueles JH, Cadenas-Sanchez C, Ekelund U, Delisle Nystrom C, Mora-Gonzalez J, Lof M, Labayen I, Ruiz JR, Ortega FB. Accelerometer Data Collection and Processing Criteria to Assess Physical Activity and Other Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Practical Considerations. Sports Med. 2017 Sep;47(9):1821-1845. doi: 10.1007/s40279-017-0716-0.
Martyn-Nemeth P, Quinn L, Hacker E, Park H, Kujath AS. Diabetes distress may adversely affect the eating styles of women with type 1 diabetes. Acta Diabetol. 2014 Aug;51(4):683-6. doi: 10.1007/s00592-014-0575-1. Epub 2014 Mar 11.
Moyen A, Rappaport AI, Fleurent-Gregoire C, Tessier AJ, Brazeau AS, Chevalier S. Relative Validation of an Artificial Intelligence-Enhanced, Image-Assisted Mobile App for Dietary Assessment in Adults: Randomized Crossover Study. J Med Internet Res. 2022 Nov 21;24(11):e40449. doi: 10.2196/40449.
Nip ASY, Reboussin BA, Dabelea D, Bellatorre A, Mayer-Davis EJ, Kahkoska AR, Lawrence JM, Peterson CM, Dolan L, Pihoker C; SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study Group. Disordered Eating Behaviors in Youth and Young Adults With Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes Receiving Insulin Therapy: The SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study. Diabetes Care. 2019 May;42(5):859-866. doi: 10.2337/dc18-2420. Epub 2019 Mar 12.
Perkins BA, Sherr JL, Mathieu C. Type 1 diabetes glycemic management: Insulin therapy, glucose monitoring, and automation. Science. 2021 Jul 30;373(6554):522-527. doi: 10.1126/science.abg4502.
Petrovski G, Campbell J, Pasha M, Day E, Hussain K, Khalifa A, van den Heuvel T. Simplified Meal Announcement Versus Precise Carbohydrate Counting in Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes Using the MiniMed 780G Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop System: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Glucose Control. Diabetes Care. 2023 Mar 1;46(3):544-550. doi: 10.2337/dc22-1692.
Polonsky WH, Hood KK, Levy CJ, MacLeish SA, Hirsch IB, Brown SA, Bode BW, Carlson AL, Shah VN, Weinstock RS, Bhargava A, Jones TC, Aleppo G, Mehta SN, Laffel LM, Forlenza GP, Sherr JL, Huyett LM, Vienneau TE, Ly TT; Omnipod 5 Research Group. How introduction of automated insulin delivery systems may influence psychosocial outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes: Findings from the first investigation with the Omnipod(R) 5 System. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2022 Aug;190:109998. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2022.109998. Epub 2022 Jul 16.
Priesterroth L, Grammes J, Clauter M, Kubiak T. Diabetes technologies in people with type 1 diabetes mellitus and disordered eating: A systematic review on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion, continuous glucose monitoring and automated insulin delivery. Diabet Med. 2021 Jul;38(7):e14581. doi: 10.1111/dme.14581. Epub 2021 May 5.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
23-07-045
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.