Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19429875›Full record

Trial reportDiabetes care2009

The effect of continuous glucose monitoring in well-controlled type 1 diabetes.

Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group, Roy W Beck, Irl B Hirsch, Lori Laffel, William V Tamborlane, Bruce W Bode, Bruce Buckingham, Peter Chase, Robert Clemons, Rosanna Fiallo-Scharer and 17 more

5 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Diabetes care, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 5 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 161 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
161citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
21.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01524705 phase4completedstarted 2012, after this paper: background citation

FLAT-SUGAR: FLuctuATion Reduction With inSULin and Glp-1 Added togetheR

Ran2012Enrolled102Registered outcomes4Posted comparisons3ConditionsType 2 DiabetesArmsexenatide, Insulin glargine, Metformin, Prandial insulin
Open the trial in the graph
NCT00406133 phase3completednot on this map

A Randomized Clinical Trial to Assess the Efficacy of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring (RT-CGM) in the Management of Type 1 Diabetes

TypeinterventionalSponsorJaeb Center for Health ResearchRan2006 to 2009Enrolled451ConditionsType 1 DiabetesArmsContinuous glucose monitor
NCT02411578 phase2completednot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

Mini-Dose Glucagon for Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Mini-dose Glucagon for Treatment of Non-severe Hypoglycemia in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes

TypeinterventionalSponsorJaeb Center for Health ResearchRan2015 to 2016Enrolled26ConditionsDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1ArmsG-Pen Mini™ (glucagon injection), Glucose Tablets
NCT04790760 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Glucose Differences Between the Left Arm and Right Arm in Diabetic Patients Using a Continuous Glucose Monitor

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of the PacificRan2021 to 2022Enrolled10ConditionsDiabetesArmsSupplement Consumption, Continuous Glucose Monitors
NCT05849428 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Blood Glucose Differences Between Left Arm and Right Arm in Patients With Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes Using a Continuous Glucose Monitor

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of the PacificRan2023 to 2024Enrolled10ConditionsType 1 Diabetes, Type 2 DiabetesArmsFreestyle Libre 3
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

161 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 394 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Continuous glucose monitoring systems for type 1 diabetes mellitus.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Diabetes: glycaemic control in type 1.BMJ clinical evidence · 2011
    Pooled it
  8. Guideline
  9. Standards of medical care in diabetes--2010.Diabetes care · 2010 · on this map
    Guideline
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

101 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

27 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group
Roy W Beck
Irl B Hirsch
Lori Laffel
William V Tamborlane
Bruce W Bode
Bruce Buckingham
Peter Chase
Robert Clemons
Rosanna Fiallo-Scharer
Larry A Fox
Lisa K Gilliam
Elbert S Huang
Craig Kollman
Aaron J Kowalski
Jean M Lawrence
Joyce Lee
Nelly Mauras
Michael O'Grady
Katrina J Ruedy
Michael Tansey
Eva Tsalikian
Stuart A Weinzimer
Darrell M Wilson
Howard Wolpert
Tim Wysocki
Dongyuan Xing
Rockefeller Foundation · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

OBJECTIVE The potential benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in the management of adults and children with well-controlled type 1 diabetes have not been examined. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A total of 129 adults and children with intensively treated type 1 diabetes (age range 8-69 years) and A1C <7.0% were randomly assigned to either continuous or standard glucose monitoring for 26 weeks. The main study outcomes were time with glucose level < or =70 mg/dl, A1C level, and severe hypoglycemic events. RESULTS At 26 weeks, biochemical hypoglycemia (< or =70 mg/dl) was less frequent in the CGM group than in the control group (median 54 vs. 91 min/day), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.16). Median time with a glucose level < or =60 mg/dl was 18 versus 35 min/day, respectively (P = 0.05). Time out of range (< or =70 or >180 mg/dl) was significantly lower in the CGM group than in the control group (377 vs. 491 min/day, P = 0.003). There was a significant treatment group difference favoring the CGM group in mean A1C at 26 weeks adjusted for baseline (P < 0.001). One or more severe hypoglycemic events occurred in 10 and 11% of the two groups, respectively (P = 1.0). Four outcome measures combining A1C and hypoglycemia data favored the CGM group in comparison with the control group (P < 0.001, 0.007, 0.005, and 0.003). CONCLUSIONS Most outcomes, including those combining A1C and hypoglycemia, favored the CGM group. The weight of evidence suggests that CGM is beneficial for individuals with type 1 diabetes who have already achieved excellent control with A1C <7.0%.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedBlood GlucoseChildDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1HumansHypoglycemiaHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinMiddle AgedMonitoring, AmbulatoryYoung AdultBlood GlucoseHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin

Identifiers

PMID19429875
PMCPMC2713649
OpenAlexW2102624023

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.