Surveillance of the System Accuracy of Two Systems for Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose After Market Approval.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. 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 · 2022
   Article
2. Glucose biosensors in clinical practice: principles, limits and perspectives of currently used devices.Theranostics · 2022
   Review
3. Evidence From a Long-Term, Systematic Post-Market Surveillance Program: Clinical Performance of a Hematocrit-Insensitive Blood Glucose Test Strip.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2021
   Article
4. System accuracy evaluation of 18 CE-marked current-generation blood glucose monitoring systems based on EN ISO 15197:2015.BMJ open diabetes research & care · 2020
   Article

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

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as