Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25562886›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2014

The surveillance error grid.

David C Klonoff, Courtney Lias, Robert Vigersky, William Clarke, Joan Lee Parkes, David B Sacks, M Sue Kirkman, Boris Kovatchev, Error Grid Panel

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04569240 (Accuracy of the Dexcom G6 Continuous Glucose Monitoring System Following Cardiac Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 92 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
92citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04569240 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Accuracy of the Dexcom G6 Continuous Glucose Monitoring System Following Cardiac Surgery

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe Cleveland ClinicRan2021 to 2024Enrolled40ConditionsSurgery--ComplicationsArmsDexcom G6 continuous glucose monitor
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

92 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Continuous Glucose Monitoring-Guided Insulin Infusion in Critically Ill Patients Promotes Safety, Improves Time Efficiency, and Enhances Provider Satisfaction.Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

32 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

9 authors.

David C KlonoffMills-Peninsula Health Services, San Mateo, CA, USA dklonoff@diabetestechnology.org.
Courtney LiasUS Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA.
Robert VigerskyWalter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA.
William ClarkeUniversity of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Joan Lee ParkesJoan Lee Parkes Consulting Inc, Bristol, IN, USA.
David B SacksNational Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
M Sue KirkmanUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Boris KovatchevUniversity of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Error Grid Panel

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Currently used error grids for assessing clinical accuracy of blood glucose monitors are based on out-of-date medical practices. Error grids have not been widely embraced by regulatory agencies for clearance of monitors, but this type of tool could be useful for surveillance of the performance of cleared products. Diabetes Technology Society together with representatives from the Food and Drug Administration, the American Diabetes Association, the Endocrine Society, and the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation, and representatives of academia, industry, and government, have developed a new error grid, called the surveillance error grid (SEG) as a tool to assess the degree of clinical risk from inaccurate blood glucose (BG) monitors. A total of 206 diabetes clinicians were surveyed about the clinical risk of errors of measured BG levels by a monitor. The impact of such errors on 4 patient scenarios was surveyed. Each monitor/reference data pair was scored and color-coded on a graph per its average risk rating. Using modeled data representative of the accuracy of contemporary meters, the relationships between clinical risk and monitor error were calculated for the Clarke error grid (CEG), Parkes error grid (PEG), and SEG. SEG action boundaries were consistent across scenarios, regardless of whether the patient was type 1 or type 2 or using insulin or not. No significant differences were noted between responses of adult/pediatric or 4 types of clinicians. Although small specific differences in risk boundaries between US and non-US clinicians were noted, the panel felt they did not justify separate grids for these 2 types of clinicians. The data points of the SEG were classified in 15 zones according to their assigned level of risk, which allowed for comparisons with the classic CEG and PEG. Modeled glucose monitor data with realistic self-monitoring of blood glucose errors derived from meter testing experiments plotted on the SEG when compared to the data plotted on the CEG and PEG produced risk estimates that were more granular and reflective of a continuously increasing risk scale. The SEG is a modern metric for clinical risk assessments of BG monitor errors that assigns a unique risk score to each monitor data point when compared to a reference value. The SEG allows the clinical accuracy of a BG monitor to be portrayed in many ways, including as the percentages of data points falling into custom-defined risk zones. For modeled data the SEG, compared with the CEG and PEG, allows greater precision for quantifying risk, especially when the risks are low. This tool will be useful to allow regulators and manufacturers to monitor and evaluate glucose monitor performance in their surveillance programs.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAdultAge FactorsBlood GlucoseBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringChildConsensusDiabetes MellitusDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Health Care SurveysHumansHypoglycemic AgentsReproducibility of ResultsRisk AssessmentBlood GlucoseHypoglycemic Agentsaccuracyblood glucoseerror gridmonitorsurveillance

Identifiers

PMID25562886
PMCPMC4764212

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.