What question did this study set out to answer?

This research aims to understand differing perceptions of diabetes technology adoption among minoritized youth and their parents or guardians.

June 13, 2026

2123-P: Perspectives on Diabetes Technology in Minoritized Families: Findings from the BEAD-T1D Study

Key Points

This research aims to understand differing perceptions of diabetes technology adoption among minoritized youth and their parents or guardians.
Interviews and focus groups conducted with youth (n=21) and parents/guardians (n=21) in English or Spanish.
Transcripts analyzed by a multilingual team using an iterative coding process.
Themes comparing youth and parent/guardian perspectives identified and categorized.
Three major themes identified: responsibility, stigma, and cost, with varying levels of agreement between youth and PG.
Youth emphasized autonomy in managing diabetes technology while parents questioned their readiness for responsibility.
Both groups highlighted cost as a significant barrier, with parents focusing on affordability and insurance issues, while youth emphasized access limitations.

Abstract

Introduction and Objective: Despite advances in diabetes technology (DT), minoritized youth with T1D continue to have lower DT use. Parents/guardians (PG) and youth are central to DT decision making and may have differing perceptions on barriers to DT adoption, particularly in minoritized families. Methods: Youth (n=21) and PG (n=21) participated in interviews/ focus groups in English or Spanish exploring experiences with DT. Transcripts were independently coded by a four-person multilingual team using an iterative process. Themes were compared across youth and PG to identify concordant and divergent perspectives on DT. Results: Three major themes with varying degrees of concordance emerged. Youth and PG diverged in expectations of responsibility: PG questioned youth readiness for consistent DT management, while youth emphasized autonomy and independence. While stigma was identified by youth and PG, it was interpreted differently. Youth emphasized peer perceptions and device visibility, PG focused on safety and social acceptance. Cost was a converging barrier. PG highlighted insurance and long-term affordability, and youth emphasized that cost restricts technology access limiting independence. Conclusion: With varying concordance, youth and PG identified stigma, responsibility, and cost as factors that shape DT use. These data offer strategies to address converging and diverging perspectives of minoritized youth and PG to equitable DT access. Disclosure D. Garfias Silva: None. J. Dixon: None. L. Figg: None. N.L. Arthur: None. A.M. Medina: None. S. Hanes: None. G.M. Shaw: None. D. Naranjo: None. J. Raymond: None. D. Maahs: Advisory Panel; Current; Abbott Diabetes, Sanofi, Medtronic, biospex, enable biosciences, kriya. K. Hood: Consultant; Current; Sanofi, MannKind Corporation, Insulet Corporation. A. Addala: None. Funding NIDDK (5K23DK131342)

Mark Helpful

Bookmark

Relay