BRBirgit Rami-Merhar

Birgit Rami-Merhar

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Current Organizations / Institutes

The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article

Previous Organizations / Institutes

The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years


Birgit Rami-Merhar has a total of 428 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:


Latest Publications

  • Cambridge hybrid closed‐loop use in very young children with type 1 diabetes: Parental expectancies during long‐term home use

    by Alexia Vidou, Ineke M. Pit‐Ten Cate, Fiona M. Campbell, Julia Ware, Roman Hovorka, Malgorzata E. Wilińska, Ulrike Schierloh, Sabine E. Hofer, Elke Fröhlich‐Reiterer, Birgit Rami‐Merhar, et al.

    Aims: To examine parental expectancies regarding automated insulin delivery (AID) during extended home use of CamAPS FX hybrid closed‐loop (HCL) in very young children with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods: Parents of 64 young children aged 1–7 with T1D participated in a multinational randomised crossover trial and an 18‐month HCL extension phase. Glycaemic outcomes (HbA1c) were recorded, and parental expectancies were assessed using the INSPIRE questionnaire, which evaluates parents' perceptions and expectations of AID systems. Assessments were conducted at baseline, during the HCL clinical trial phase and after the 18‐month extension phase in the home environment. Linear mixed models were used to analyse outcomes across time. Results: HCL use during the clinical trial phase improved HbA1c (baseline: 56.03 ± 7.31 mmol/mol [7.3%] vs. clinical trial: 50.78 ± 6.90 [6.8%]; p < 0.001), with benefits sustained over the 18‐month extension period (49.00 ± 6.63 [6.8%]; p = 0.45). Parental expectancies did not change during the clinical trial phase (baseline: 44.78 ± 34.70 vs. clinical trial: 42.10 ± 38.11; p = 0.629, d = 0.05) but increased markedly after 18 months of home use (89.83 ± 9.35; p < 0.001, d = 1.14). Conclusions: Prolonged HCL use supports sustained glycaemic benefits while parental positive expectancies regarding AID increase over time. These findings suggest that parental trust develops through experience‐dependent adaptation shaped by the combination of stable glycaemic outcomes and sustained real‐world use and is important for continued engagement with AID. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03784027; ClinicalTrials.gov

  • Open Access

    Diabetes mellitus im Kindes- und Jugendalter (Update 2026)

    by Birgit Rami-Merhar, Elke Fröhlich-Reiterer, Sabine E. Hofer, Dagmar Meraner, Katrin Nagl, Maria Fritsch

    Zusammenfassung: Im Kindes- und Jugendalter ist in Österreich, im Gegensatz zum Erwachsenenalter, der Diabetes mellitus Typ 1 (T1D) die am häufigsten auftretende Form des Diabetes mellitus (94,2 %). Nach der Diagnosestellung sollte die Betreuung der Kinder und Jugendlichen in einem pädiatrischen Zentrum mit viel Erfahrung in pädiatrischer Diabetologie erfolgen. Eine lebenslange Insulintherapie ist notwendig, wobei diese individuell an das Alter und den Alltag der Familie angepasst werden soll. In diesem Alter wird ausdrücklich die Verwendung von Diabetestechnologie (kontinuierliche Sensorglukosemessung, Insulinpumpentherapie und automatisierte Insulindosierung [AID]) empfohlen. Eine möglichst optimale metabolische Einstellung ab Therapiebeginn verbessert die Langzeitprognose der jungen Menschen mit Diabetes. Ein wesentlicher Teil in der Betreuung ist die Schulung von jungen Menschen mit Diabetes und deren Erziehungsberechtigten von einem entsprechend ausgebildeten multidisziplinären Team, bestehend aus pädiatrischen DiabetologInnen, DiabetesberaterInnen, DiätologInnen, PsychologInnen und SozialarbeiterInnen. Die APEDÖ (Arbeitsgruppe für pädiatrische Endokrinologie und Diabetologie Österreich) und die ISPAD (International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes) empfehlen als metabolisches Ziel für alle pädiatrischen Altersgruppen einen HbA 1c -Wert ≤ 7,0 % (IFCC ≤ 53 mmol/mol) bzw. ≤ 6,5 rel % (IFCC ≤ 48 mmol/mol) bei Verwendung von fortgeschrittener Diabetestechnologie wie AID mit einer „time in range“ (TIR) > 70 % ohne schwere Hypoglykämien. Eine altersentsprechend normale körperliche, kognitive und psychosoziale Entwicklung sowie die Vermeidung von Akutkomplikationen (schwere Hypoglykämien, diabetische Ketoazidose), das Screening auf assoziierte Erkrankungen und die Prävention von diabetesbedingten Spätkomplikationen zum Erhalt einer hohen Lebensqualität sind die Ziele der pädiatrischen Diabetestherapie.

  • Open Access

    Diabetestechnologie (Update 2026)

    by Ingrid Schütz-Fuhrmann, B. Rami-Merhar, Sabine E. Hofer, Elke Fröhlich-Reiterer, Martin Tauschmann, Julia K. Mader, Michael Resl, Alexandra Kautzky-Willer, Yvonne Winhofer-Stöckl, Thomas Wascher, et al.

    Zusammenfassung: Diese Leitlinie repräsentiert die Empfehlungen der Österreichischen Diabetes Gesellschaft (ÖDG) zur Nutzung von Diabetes-Technologie (kontinuierliche Glukosemesssysteme [CGM], Insulinpumpentherapie, Automated-Insulin-Delivery-Systeme [AID], „connected insulin pens“, Diabetes-Apps) und den Zugang zu diesen technologischen Innovationen für Menschen mit Diabetes mellitus. Die Leitlinie wurde basierend auf aktueller wissenschaftlicher Evidenz erstellt.

  • The Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring to Diagnose Stage 2 Type 1 Diabetes

    by Julia K. Mader, Jenise C. Wong, Guido Freckmann, Jose Garcia-Tirado, Irl B. Hirsch, Suzanne Bennett Johnson, David Kerr, Sun H. Kim, Rayhan Lal, Eslam Montaser, et al.

    This consensus report evaluates the potential role of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in screening for stage 2 type 1 diabetes (T1D). CGM offers a minimally invasive alternative to venous blood testing for detecting dysglycemia, facilitating early identification of at-risk individuals for confirmatory blood testing. A panel of experts reviewed current evidence and addressed key questions regarding CGM’s diagnostic accuracy and screening protocols. They concluded that while CGM cannot yet replace blood-based diagnostics, it holds promise as a screening tool that could lead to earlier, more effective intervention. Metrics such as time above range >140 mg/dL could indicate progression risk, and artificial intelligence (AI)-based modeling may enhance predictive capabilities. Further research is needed to establish CGM-based diagnostic criteria and refine screening strategies to improve T1D detection and intervention.


  • Open Access

    Pädiatrische Diabetologie: Vorteile der neuen Technologien

    by Birgit Rami-Merhar

  • Open Access

    Retrospective Comparison of Commercially Available Automated Insulin Delivery With Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery Systems in Type 1 Diabetes

    by Anna Schütz, Birgit Rami-Merhar, Ingrid Schütz-Fuhrmann, Nicole Blauensteiner, Petra Baumann, Tina Pöttler, Julia K. Mader

    Background: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems have shown to improve glycemic control in a range of populations and settings. At the start of this study, only one commercial AID system had entered the Austrian market (MiniMed 670G, Medtronic). However, there is an ever-growing community of people living with type 1 diabetes (PWT1D) using open-source (OS) AID systems. Materials and Methods: A total of 144 PWT1D who used either the MiniMed 670G (670G) or OS-AID systems routinely for a period of at least three to a maximum of six months, between February 18, 2020 and January 15, 2023, were retrospectively analyzed (116 670G aged from 2.6 to 71.8 years and 28 OS-AID aged from 3.4 to 53.5 years). The goal is to evaluate and compare the quality of glycemic control of commercially available AID and OS-AID systems and to present all data by an in-depth descriptive analysis of the population. No statistical tests were performed. Results: The PWT1D using OS-AID systems spent more time in range (TIR) 70-180 mg/dL (81.7% vs 73.9%), less time above range (TAR) 181-250 mg/dL (11.1% vs 19.6%), less TAR >250 mg/dL (2.5% vs 4.3%), and more time below range (TBR) 54-69 mg/dL (2.2% vs 1.7%) than PWT1D using the 670G system. The TBR was comparable in both groups (0.3% vs 0.4%). In the OS-AID group, median glucose level and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) were lower than in the 670G system group (130 vs 150 mg/dL; 6.2% vs 7.0%). Conclusion: In conclusion, both groups were able to achieve satisfactory glycemic outcomes independent of age, gender, and diabetes duration. However, the PWT1D using OS-AID systems attained an even better glycemic control with no clinical safety concerns.


  • Expected Basal Insulin Requirement During Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion Therapy by Age Group, Sex, and Body Mass Index, Based on 25,718 Young People with Type 1 Diabetes in the DPV Registry

    by Torben Biester, Alexander Eckert, Marianne Becker, Claudia Boettcher, Sven Golembowski, Bettina Heidtmann, Christoph Klinkert, Silvia Müther, Birgit Rami-Merhar, Reinhard W Holl

    Background: Since the introduction of insulin pumps into the therapy of pediatric subjects, different approaches have been taken to find optimal basal rates. Previously, the DPV registry provided circadian basal rate patterns for different age groups. As the number of pump users has increased recently and short-acting insulin analogues are now predominant, we performed a new analysis with a larger data pool. Methods: We included all recent basal profiles from type 1 diabetes (T1D) patients between 1 and 25 years from the DPV 2021 data pool. We excluded night-time-only pump users, human regular insulin users, and daily basal rates 1.0 U/(kgBW·d). Results: In the analysis of profiles from 25,718 young persons with T1D, differences in the daily pattern of basal rates were found between age groups. In addition, we saw significant ( P < 0.001) differences in total daily basal dose between genders in all age groups except adults. In addition, the shape of the expected basal-rate pattern differed by body mass index, HbA1c, and use of continuous glucose monitoring. Discussion: This analysis demonstrates multiple factors influencing basal patterns and insulin requirement, including age group, gender, overweight, HbA1c, bolus frequency, and sensor use. As circadian basal rates are still mandatory for initiating insulin pump therapy with or without automation, a multimodal approach is necessary to estimate optimal basal rates.


  • Open Access

    Time Spent in Hypoglycemia According to Age and Time of Day: Observations During Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery

    by Heba Alwan, Julia Ware, Charlotte K. Boughton, Malgorzata E. Wilinska, Janet M. Allen, Rama Lakshman, Munachiso Nwokolo, Sara Hartnell, Lia Bally, Carine de Beaufort, et al.

    Objective: We aimed to assess whether percentage of time spent in hypoglycemia during closed-loop insulin delivery differs by age group and time of day. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from hybrid closed-loop studies involving young children (2–7 years), children and adolescents (8–18 years), adults (19–59 years), and older adults (≥60 years) with type 1 diabetes. Main outcome was time spent in hypoglycemia P < 0.001 for difference between age groups. Time spent in hypoglycemia during nighttime (midnight–05:59) was lower than during daytime (06:00–23:59) across all age groups. Conclusion: Time in hypoglycemia was highest in the pediatric age group during closed-loop insulin delivery. Hypoglycemia burden was lowest overnight across all age groups.


  • Open Access

    Diabetestechnologie (Update 2023)

    by Ingrid Schütz-Fuhrmann, Birgit Rami-Merhar, Elke Fröhlich-Reiterer, Sabine E. Hofer, Martin Tauschmann, Julia K. Mader, Michael Resl, Alexandra Kautzky-Willer, Yvonne Winhofer-Stöckl, Markus Laimer, et al.

    Zusammenfassung Diese Leitlinie repräsentiert die Empfehlungen der Österreichischen Diabetes Gesellschaft (ÖDG) zur Nutzung von Diabetes-Technologie (Insulinpumpentherapie; kontinuierliche Glukosemesssysteme, CGM; Hybrid Closed Loop Systeme, HCL; Automated Insulin Delivery Systeme, AID, Diabetes-Apps) und den Zugang zu diesen technologischen Innovationen für Menschen mit Diabetes mellitus. Die Leitlinie wurde basierend auf aktueller wissenschaftlicher Evidenz erstellt.


  • Open Access

    Diabetes mellitus im Kindes- und Jugendalter (Update 2023)

    by Birgit Rami-Merhar, Elke Fröhlich-Reiterer, Sabine E. Hofer, Maria Fritsch

    Zusammenfassung: Im Kindes- und Jugendalter ist, im Gegensatz zum Erwachsenenalter, der Diabetes mellitus Typ 1 (T1D) die am häufigsten auftretende Form des Diabetes mellitus (> 90 %). Nach der Diagnosestellung sollte die Betreuung der Kinder und Jugendlichen in einem pädiatrischen Zentrum mit viel Erfahrung in pädiatrischer Diabetologie erfolgen. Eine lebenslange Insulintherapie ist notwendig, wobei diese individuell an das Alter und den Alltag der Familie angepasst werden soll. In diesem Alter wird ausdrücklich die Verwendung von Diabetestechnologie (Sensorglukosemessung, Insulinpumpentherapie und seit kurzem eine Hybrid-Closed-Loop-Therapie) empfohlen. Eine möglichst optimale metabolische Einstellung ab Therapiebeginn verbessert die Langzeitprognose der jungen Menschen mit Diabetes. Ein wesentlicher Teil in der Betreuung ist die Schulung von PatientInnen und Eltern von einem entsprechend ausgebildeten multidisziplinären Team, bestehend aus pädiatrischen DiabetologInnen, DiabetesberaterInnen, DiätologInnen, PsychologInnen und SozialarbeiterInnen. Die APEDÖ (Arbeitsgruppe für pädiatrische Endokrinologie und Diabetologie Österreich) und die ISPAD (International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes) empfehlen als metabolisches Ziel für alle pädiatrischen Altersgruppen einen HbA1c-Wert ≤ 7,0 % (IFCC ≤ 53 mmol/mol) mit einer „Time in Range“ (TIR) > 70 % ohne schwere Hypoglykämien. Eine altersentsprechend normale körperliche, kognitive und psychosoziale Entwicklung sowie die Vermeidung von Akutkomplikationen (schwere Hypoglykämien, diabetische Ketoazidose), das Screening auf assoziierte Erkrankungen und die Prävention von diabetesbedingten Spätkomplikationen zum Erhalt einer hohen Lebensqualität sind die Ziele der pädiatrischen Diabetestherapie.