ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2012
New Criteria for Assessing the Accuracy of Blood Glucose Monitors meeting, October 28, 2011.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient-based quality control for glucometers: using the moving sum of positive patient results and moving average.Biochemia medica · 2020Article
- Lab-on-chip technology for chronic disease diagnosis.NPJ digital medicine · 2018Review
- Accuracy Evaluation of CONTOUR(®)PLUS Compared With Four Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2015Article
- Point-of-care blood glucose testing for diabetes care in hospitalized patients: an evidence-based review.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2014Review
- Analytical performance of glucose monitoring systems at different blood glucose ranges and analysis of outliers in a clinical setting.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2014Article
- Assessing the analytical performance of systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose: concepts of performance evaluation and definition of metrological key terms.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2013Review
- System accuracy evaluation of 43 blood glucose monitoring systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose according to DIN EN ISO 15197.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2012Article
- Analyse Accuracy of Glucose Monitors without any Dedicated Software Package.Indian journal of endocrinology and metabolismArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Glucose meters (GMs) are routinely used for self-monitoring of blood glucose by patients and for point-of-care glucose monitoring by health care providers in outpatient and inpatient settings. Although widely assumed to be accurate, numerous reports of inaccuracies with resulting morbidity and mortality have been noted. Insulin dosing errors based on inaccurate GMs are most critical. On October 28, 2011, the Diabetes Technology Society invited 45 diabetes technology clinicians who were attending the 2011 Diabetes Technology Meeting to participate in a closed-door meeting entitled New Criteria for Assessing the Accuracy of Blood Glucose Monitors. This report reflects the opinions of most of the attendees of that meeting. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the public, and several medical societies are currently in dialogue to establish a new standard for GM accuracy. This update to the FDA standard is driven by improved meter accuracy, technological advances (pumps, bolus calculators, continuous glucose monitors, and insulin pens), reports of hospital and outpatient deaths, consumer complaints about inaccuracy, and research studies showing that several approved GMs failed to meet FDA or International Organization for Standardization standards in postapproval testing. These circumstances mandate a set of new GM standards that appropriately match the GMs' analytical accuracy to the clinical accuracy required for their intended use, as well as ensuring their ongoing accuracy following approval. The attendees of the New Criteria for Assessing the Accuracy of Blood Glucose Monitors meeting proposed a graduated standard and other methods to improve GM performance, which are discussed in this meeting report.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.