Today I was able to share that my Letter to the Editor was published in the Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology. It’s on why we need to set expectations to help patients successfully adopt hybrid closed loop/artificial pancreas/automated insulin delivery system technology. (You can read it via image copies in the first link.)
I’ve published a few times in academic journals. Last year, Scott and I published another Letter to the Editor in JDST with the OpenAPS outcomes study we had presented at the 2016 ADA Scientific Sessions conference.
But, I’m sure people are wondering why I choose to do so – especially as I am 1) a patient and 2) a non-academic. (Although in case you missed it – I’m now the Principal Investigator on a grant-funded study!)
While there are many healthcare providers, researchers, industry employees, FDA staff, etc. who read blogs like this and are up to speed on the bleeding edge of diabetes technology… there are easily 10x the number that do not.
- This means most healthcare providers don’t know anything about “eating soon” mode as a strategy for optimizing meal-time insulin activity in the liver to create better post-meal outcomes without risking additional hypoglycemia from pre-bolus. (This works for DIY closed loopers as well as non-loopers who can do this manually.)
- This means many also don’t know about the DIY solutions available to patients – whether that be DIY tools like xDrip(+); Nightscout for remote monitoring; DIY closed looping; DIY open looping tools; or DIY tools for automatic basal rate and other ratio adjustments.
And if they don’t know about the existence of this world, they won’t know about the valuable lessons we’re learning and won’t be able to share those lessons and knowledge with other healthcare providers and the patients that they treat.
So, in my pursuit to find more ways to share knowledge from our community with the rest of the diabetes community, this is why we submit abstracts for posters and presentations to conferences like ADA’s Scientific Sessions. Our abstracts are evaluated just like the abstracts from traditional healthcare providers (as far as they can tell, I’m just another academic, albeit one with fewer credentials ;)), and I’m proud that they’re evaluated and deemed worthy of poster presentations alongside mainstream researchers. Ditto for our written publications, whether they be letters to the editor or other types of articles submitted to journals and publications.
We need to find more ways to share and distribute knowledge with the “traditional” medical and academic research world. And I’d love to do more – so please share ideas if you have them. And if you’re someone who bridges the gap to the traditional world, I appreciate your help sharing these types of articles and conversations with your colleagues.