ReviewJournal of diabetes science and technology2013
Average daily risk range as a measure for clinical research and routine care.
Review 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 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sensitivity of Traditional and Risk-Based Glycemic Variability Measures to the Effect of Glucose-Lowering Treatment in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2015Pooled it
- The Evolving Landscape of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Metrics in Type 1 Diabetes: Narrative Literature Review.JMIR diabetes · 2026Review
- A machine learning approach to predicting severe diabetes distress in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus.Journal of diabetes investigation · 2026Observational
- Glucose dysregulation and glycemic phenotyping in chronic migraine.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Influence of MRI-based boundary conditions on type B aortic dissection simulations in false lumen with or without abdominal aorta involvement.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Article
- Effects of Variability in Glycemic Indices on Longevity in Chinese Centenarians.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- The Role of Glycemic Variability in Cardiovascular Disorders.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- A Review of Continuous Glucose Monitoring-Based Composite Metrics for Glycemic Control.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2020Review
- Metrics for glycaemic control - from HbANature reviews. Endocrinology · 2017 · on this mapReview
- Metrics Beyond Hemoglobin A1C in Diabetes Management: Time in Range, Hypoglycemia, and Other Parameters.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2017Review
- Evaluation of the Average Daily Risk Range as a Measure of Glycemic Variability in Youths with Type 1 Diabetes.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2015Article
- Measures of Risk and Glucose Variability in Adults Versus Youths.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2015Article
- Utility of different glycemic control metrics for optimizing management of diabetes.World journal of diabetes · 2015Review
- Cell based metabolic barriers to glucose diffusion: macrophages and continuous glucose monitoring.Biomaterials · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is emerging evidence suggesting that glycemic variability may relate to risk for diabetes-related complications. This article provides a description of average daily risk range (ADRR), a diabetes-specific measure of risk for hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, and provides a summary of research using ADRR and clinical applications of ADRR. Average daily risk range is a variability metric that is based on "risk" values obtained from glucose levels that are mathematically transformed to give equal weight to hyperglycemic and hypoglycemic excursions. It can be calculated using self-monitoring of blood glucose or continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data. The ADRR is scored based on risk categories: low risk, 0-19; moderate risk, 20-40; and high risk, 40 and above. Research using ADRR has found it to be a reliable predictor of extreme blood glucose values regardless of diabetes type and patients' age. Moreover, in treatment studies, ADRR presents as a very conservative measure of variability. Clinically, ADRR can provide meaningful data related to patients' risk for hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia that is not available from glycated hemoglobin values. Average daily risk range scores may also help clinicians to identify patients who may be overtreating blood glucose levels, leading to very high or low values. To expand the utility of ADRR, future research should examine the validity of existing risk cutoff scores for pediatric patients, determine if ADRR cutoff scores need to be modified for CGM data, and investigate whether patients' ADRR scores also relate to the development of long-term complications, including retinopathy and microalbuminuria.
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.