Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21880239›Full record

SynthesisJournal of diabetes science and technology2011

Efficacy of continuous glucose monitoring in improving glycemic control and reducing hypoglycemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Gunjan Y Gandhi, Michelle Kovalaske, Yogish Kudva, Kristin Walsh, Mohamed B Elamin, Melody Beers, Cathy Coyle, Melissa Goalen, Mohammad Safwan Murad, Patricia J Erwin and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 125 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Guideline
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Continuous glucose monitoring systems for type 1 diabetes mellitus.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Blood Glucose Levels of Subelite Athletes During 6 Days of Free Living.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2016
    Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial
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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Gunjan Y GandhiDivision of Endocrinology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida 32224, USA. gandhi.gunjan@mayo.edu
Michelle Kovalaske
Yogish Kudva
Kristin Walsh
Mohamed B Elamin
Melody Beers
Cathy Coyle
Melissa Goalen
Mohammad Safwan Murad
Patricia J Erwin
Joshua Corpus
Victor M Montori
M Hassan Murad
Mayo Clinic in Florida · USMayo Clinic · USWinnMed · USJacksonville College · USMarshfield Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in improving glycemic control and reducing hypoglycemia compared to self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG).

methodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, and Scopus for randomized trials of adults and children with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T1DM or T2DM). Pairs of reviewers independently selected studies, assessed methodological quality, and extracted data. Meta-analytic estimates of treatment effects were generated using a random-effects model.

resultsNineteen trials were eligible and provided data for meta-analysis. Overall, CGM was associated with a significant reduction in mean hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c; weighted mean difference (WMD) of -0.27% (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.44 to -0.10)]. This was true for adults with T1DM as well as T2DM [WMD -0.50% (95% CI -0.69 to -0.30) and -0.70 (95% CI, -1.14 to -0.27), respectively]. No significant effect was noted in children and adolescents. There was no significant difference in HbA1c reduction between studies of real-time versus non-realtime devices (WMD -0.22%, 95% CI, -0.59 to 0.15 versus -0.30%, 95% CI, -0.49 to -0.10; p for interaction 0.71). The quality of evidence was moderate due to imprecision, suggesting increased risk for bias. Data for the incidence of severe or nocturnal hypoglycemia were sparse and imprecise. In studies that reported patient satisfaction, users felt confident about the device and gave positive reviews.

conclusionContinuous glucose monitoring seems to help improve glycemic control in adults with T1DM and T2DM. The effect on hypoglycemia incidence is imprecise and unclear. Larger trials with longer follow-up are needed to assess the efficacy of CGM in reducing patient-important complications without significantly increasing the burden of care for patients with diabetes.

Indexed as

Blood Glucose Self-MonitoringAdultBlood GlucoseChildDiabetes MellitusHumansHypoglycemiaRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeBlood Glucose

Identifiers

PMID21880239
PMCPMC3192603
OpenAlexW2008014747

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.