Professional Stakeholders' Perspectives on Early Screening for Type 1 Diabetes in Children: A Systematic Review.
14 affiliations
- 1School of Psychology, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
- 2Diabetes and Endocrinology Department, General Medicine, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
- 3Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
- 4Department of Psychology, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
- 5Clinical and Health Psychology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
- 6Department of Medical Psychology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
- 7Department of Applied Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
- 8Department of Paediatric Endocrinology, Birmingham Children's Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
- 9Department of Chronic Diseases and Metabolism, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
- 10Health Economics and Value Assessment Department, Sanofi, Paris, Île-de-France, France.
- 11Research Department, Breakthrough T1D, New York, New York, USA.
- 12Spotlight-AQ Limited, Portcheste, Hampshire, UK.
- 13Department of Endocrinology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
- 14School of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
Abstract
Early screening for type 1 diabetes (T1D) is receiving increasing attention as presymptomatic screening initiatives and disease-modifying therapies continue to expand. However, the perspectives of professional stakeholders, who play a pivotal role in implementation, patient engagement, and health system preparedness, have not been systematically synthesised. We conducted a systematic review to examine professional views on paediatric early T1D screening. Following PRISMA guidelines, six databases (Medline, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ASSIA) and grey literature were searched through January 2026. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria, predominantly involving paediatricians and diabetes specialists; nurses, genetic counsellors, policymakers, and other healthcare professionals were represented in few studies. Methodological appraisal using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) identified recurring limitations in sample representativeness and potential nonresponse bias. Given the heterogeneity and primarily descriptive nature of the study design and outcomes, findings were synthesised narratively. Professional perspectives varied according to the population targeted, professional group studied, screening scenario, and the implementation context. Where directly compared, support was greater for at-risk than for general-population screening. Reported benefits included diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) prevention, earlier clinical engagement, and improved preparedness for families. However, concerns persisted regarding psychosocial burden, workforce capacity, and unclear referral and follow-up pathways. More favourable evaluations were reported in some structured programmes, although these findings may reflect reliance on existing infrastructures and targeted participant selection. By consolidating previously fragmented evidence, this review identifies recurring clinical, psychosocial, and organisational considerations relevant to paediatric T1D screening. These findings primarily reflect clinical perspectives and indicate conditional rather than uniform support. Further studies should evaluate how standardised pathways, professional training, and integrated psychosocial support affect the feasibility and acceptability of screening across different healthcare contexts.
Related
- Screening Children for Early-Stage Type 1 Diabetes
- Perspectives and experiences of youth and caregivers on screening and monitoring islet autoimmunity
- In Vitro Screening of Sargassum spp. Ethanolic Extracts for Antioxidant Activity and Inhibition of Disease-Associated Enzymatic Targets Related to Diabetes, Alzheimer's Disease, and Parkinson's Disease.
- International consensus guidance for general population screening for islet autoantibodies to diagnose early-stage type 1 diabetes: a nominal group technique process
- Phytochemistry, pharmacology, safety, and applications of Buddleja globosa Hope [Scrophulariaceae]: a systematic review from bioactive metabolites and mechanisms to translational perspectives
BibTeX
@article{gatti2026professional,
title = {{Professional Stakeholders' Perspectives on Early Screening for Type 1 Diabetes in Children: A Systematic Review.}},
author = {Francesca Gatti and Bianca M Milazzo and Lauren M Quinn and Antonio Catarinella and Gaia Perego and Francesca Milano and Karin Lange and Sheila Greenfield and Renuka Dias and Jurgen Vercauteren and Adya Rao and Aymeric Mahieu and Carmen Hurtado Del Pozo and Valentina E Di Mattei and Katharine Barnard and Chantal Mathieu and Parth Narendran and Emanuele Bosi and Olga Boiko and EDENT1FI},
journal = {Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1002/dmrr.70240},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42895779},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Professional Stakeholders' Perspectives on Early Screening for Type 1 Diabetes in Children: A Systematic Review.
AU - Francesca Gatti
AU - Bianca M Milazzo
AU - Lauren M Quinn
AU - Antonio Catarinella
AU - Gaia Perego
AU - Francesca Milano
AU - Karin Lange
AU - Sheila Greenfield
AU - Renuka Dias
AU - Jurgen Vercauteren
AU - Adya Rao
AU - Aymeric Mahieu
AU - Carmen Hurtado Del Pozo
AU - Valentina E Di Mattei
AU - Katharine Barnard
AU - Chantal Mathieu
AU - Parth Narendran
AU - Emanuele Bosi
AU - Olga Boiko
AU - EDENT1FI
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/01
JO - Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews
DO - 10.1002/dmrr.70240
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42895779
AB - Early screening for type 1 diabetes (T1D) is receiving increasing attention as presymptomatic screening initiatives and disease-modifying therapies continue to expand. However, the perspectives of professional stakeholders, who play a pivotal role in implementation, patient engagement, and health system preparedness, have not been systematically synthesised. We conducted a systematic review to examine professional views on paediatric early T1D screening. Following PRISMA guidelines, six databases (Medline, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ASSIA) and grey literature were searched through January 2026. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria, predominantly involving paediatricians and diabetes specialists; nurses, genetic counsellors, policymakers, and other healthcare professionals were represented in few studies. Methodological appraisal using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) identified recurring limitations in sample representativeness and potential nonresponse bias. Given the heterogeneity and primarily descriptive nature of the study design and outcomes, findings were synthesised narratively. Professional perspectives varied according to the population targeted, professional group studied, screening scenario, and the implementation context. Where directly compared, support was greater for at-risk than for general-population screening. Reported benefits included diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) prevention, earlier clinical engagement, and improved preparedness for families. However, concerns persisted regarding psychosocial burden, workforce capacity, and unclear referral and follow-up pathways. More favourable evaluations were reported in some structured programmes, although these findings may reflect reliance on existing infrastructures and targeted participant selection. By consolidating previously fragmented evidence, this review identifies recurring clinical, psychosocial, and organisational considerations relevant to paediatric T1D screening. These findings primarily reflect clinical perspectives and indicate conditional rather than uniform support. Further studies should evaluate how standardised pathways, professional training, and integrated psychosocial support affect the feasibility and acceptability of screening across different healthcare contexts.
SN - 1520-7552
SN - 1520-7560
ER -