ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2013
Clinical implications and economic impact of accuracy differences among commercially available blood glucose monitoring systems.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Monitoring of the Analytical Performance of Four Different Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems: A Post-market Performance Follow-Up Study.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2024Article
- Impact of Blood Glucose Monitoring System Accuracy on Clinical Decision Making for Diabetes Management.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2023Article
- Mean Absolute Relative Difference of Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems and Relationship to ISO 15197.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2022Article
- Impact of Two Different Reference Measurement Procedures on Apparent System Accuracy of 18 CE-Marked Current-Generation Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2022Article
- Diabetes Complications and Related Comorbidities Impair the Accuracy of FreeStyle Libre, a Flash Continuous Glucose Monitoring System, in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2022Article
- Toward a Framework for Outcome-Based Analytical Performance Specifications: A Methodology Review of Indirect Methods for Evaluating the Impact of Measurement Uncertainty on Clinical Outcomes.Clinical chemistry · 2019Review
- Bolus Insulin Dose Error Distributions Based on Results From Two Clinical Trials Comparing Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2017Article
- Interferences and Limitations in Blood Glucose Self-Testing: An Overview of the Current Knowledge.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2016Review
- Accuracy Evaluation of CONTOUR(®)PLUS Compared With Four Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2015Article
- A Multicenter Performance Evaluation of a Blood Glucose Monitoring System in 21 Leading Hospitals in Spain.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2015Article
- Performance of Cleared Blood Glucose Monitors.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2015Review
- Performance and System Validation of a New Cellular-Enabled Blood Glucose Monitoring System Using a New Standard Reference Measurement Procedure of Isotope Dilution UPLC-MRM Mass Spectrometry.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2015Article
- Impact of a reduced error range of SMBG in insulin-treated patients in Germany.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite accuracy standards, there are performance differences among commercially available blood glucose monitoring (BGM) systems. The objective of this analysis was to assess the potential clinical and economic impact of accuracy differences of various BGM systems using a modeling approach.
methodsWe simulated additional risk of hypoglycemia due to blood glucose (BG) measurement errors of five different BGM systems based on results of a real-world accuracy study, while retaining other sources of glycemic variability. Using data from published literature, we estimated an annual additional number of required medical interventions as a result of hypoglycemia. We based our calculations on patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and T2DM requiring multiple daily injections (MDIs) of insulin in a U.S. health care system. We estimated additional costs attributable to treatment of severe hypoglycemic episodes resulting from BG measurement errors.
resultsResults from our model predict an annual difference of approximately 296,000 severe hypoglycemic episodes from BG measurement errors for T1DM (105,000 for T2DM MDI) patients for the estimated U.S. population of 958,800 T1DM and 1,353,600 T2DM MDI patients, using the least accurate BGM system versus patients using the most accurate system in a U.S. health care system. This resulted in additional direct costs of approximately $339 million for T1DM and approximately $121 million for T2DM MDI patients per year.
conclusionOur analysis shows that error patterns over the operating range of BGM meter may lead to relevant clinical and economic outcome differences that may not be reflected in a common accuracy metric or standard. Further research is necessary to validate the findings of this model-based approach.
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.