My personal viewpoint for my answer is not as health professional advice or opinion.
In one sense the form of insulin therapy may depend on whether you are looking at someone just diagnosed with TID, compared to someone who becomes insulin-dependent after some years on other diabetes therapy. ( e.g. the usual situation with someone diagnosed with LADA).
The 30 year follow up paper on the DCCT/EDIC study,
https://doi/10.2337/d13-2112 points out, and reiterates previous reports, that the degree of BSL control in first 6 1/2 years of diagnosis of TID is crucial to the degree of diabetes complications, both mico- and macrovascular, in the future of that TID's life.
The better the control the lower the incidence of complications and that effect continues even if BSLs control is not fully maintained after say the first 10 years. Hence the reason for my second paragraph.
In terms of BSL control, not just by HBAIC measurement but also by range of BSL variation which cgm can measure, one person might do better on MDI for that time of at least 6 1/2 years and ? preferably longer, another better on an insulin pump.
Healthcare costs are a consideration on a regional and country level of course when comparing MDI vs insulin pump with some studies suggesting intensive MDI with 1/2 unit pen measurements giving as good results as insulin pump therapy (i cannot locate the reference at the the moment).
My wish is that insulin pump therapy with cgm be prioritised into several areas, one being for the first 10 years of every newly diagnosed TID with children and pregnant mothers receiving the top priority in that grouping
But as always politics enters into such decisions but i contend that the potential savings that better diabetes control early on and expected by application of the DCCT and EDIC study results provides considerable health cost savings.
But of course few politicians think beyond the next election cycle.
If Dawn phenomenon is a problem then an insulin pump might be a better choice first up also, as well as for those particularly hypo-prone.
I am yet to be convinced that looping is necessarily better than not looping on a pump particularly on the currently popular high carb diets so readily promulgated to most newcomers.
The other thing I personally believe is that a low carb, and possibly including a ketogenic diet, as part of that beginning of a TID on insulin, with careful monitoring say, with cgm if affordable, is the best way to achieve all the best outcomes revealed by the DCCT and follow up EDIC study results.
Of course DCCT and EDIC were not about diet per se but research on the potential benefits of low carb high fat/protein diets and ketogenic diet for many diabetics, T2 and T1, is promising. I contend that diet and insulin are intricately related and this relationship can influence the choice of insulin delivery.
Because intensive insulin therapy in the DCCT led to many more hypos in that group compared to the conventional treatment group it is noteworthy that surveys of those on low carb diets as per Dr Bernstein's protocol (see drludwig.com blog) have shown the lowest incidence of hypos and the best HBAICs and lowest incidence of damaging BSL excursions of any survey/study of TIDs so far.
And insulin pumps were a common delivery system used in the afore-mentioned survey but I am unaware of how many may or may not have been using looping (if any).