Gold and Clarke Questionnaires Identify Different People With Insulin‐Treated Diabetes and Impaired Awareness of Hypoglycaemia in Almost 60% of Cases: A Post Hoc Analysis From the Hypo‐ METRICS Study
An erratum to this article was published (Diabetes Obes Metab, 3 Nov 2026 ↗)
Authors' conclusion
Gold and Clarke show moderate consistency (37%-54%) in identifying IAH in insulin-treated diabetes, with/without CGM use, each associated with different SHE rates, indicating the two questionnaires measure different, independent aspects of IAH.
Study context
- Population
- People with insulin-treated diabetes (T1D or T2D) with ≥ 1 hypoglycaemic event in the previous 3 monthscompleted Gold and Clarke
- Participants
- 232 vs 285
- Comparison
- Gold vs Clarke questionnaires for identifying impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia (IAH)
- T1Dn = 232
- T2Dn = 285
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
IAH prevalence by Gold
21% vs. 26%
P = 0.1
T1D vs T2D
IAH prevalence by Clarke
14% vs. 18%
P = 0.2
T1D vs T2D
IAH prevalence by Clarke's Hypoglycaemia Awareness Status (Clarke-HAS)
41% vs. 48%
P = 0.2
T1D vs T2D
- Overlap Gold ≥ 4 and Clarke ≥ 4 (T1D: 45%; T2D: 37%)
- 40%
- Overlap Gold ≥ 4 and Clarke-HAS ≥ 2 (T1D: 43%; T2D: 47%)
- 45%
Further findings
| Outcome | SHE rate | P value |
|---|---|---|
| SHE rate in IAH sample by identifying questionnaireGold vs Clarke | 9% vs. 53% | P < 0.001 |
| SHE rate in IAH sample by identifying questionnaireGold-Clarke overlap vs Clarke | 20% vs. 53% | P < 0.001 |
Overlap Gold ≥ 4 and Clarke ≥ 4 by CGM use
- CGM vs non-CGM users (T1D: 50% vs. 35%; T2D: 32% vs. 40%)
- 41% vs. 39%
Overlap Gold ≥ 4 and Clarke-HAS ≥ 2 by CGM use
- CGM vs non-CGM users (T1D: 38% vs. 54%; T2D: 40% vs. 53%)
- 39% vs. 53%
Original publication
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →