Comment on "The Performance and Usability of a Factory-Calibrated Flash Glucose Monitoring System" by Bailey et al.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Flash Glucose Monitoring: A Review of the Literature with a Special Focus on Type 1 Diabetes.Nutrients · 2018
   Review
2. Replacement of Blood Glucose Measurements by Measurements With Systems for Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring (rtCGM) or CGM With Intermittent Scanning (iscCGM): A German View.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2017
   Article
3. How Much Accuracy of Interstitial Glucose Measurement Is Enough? Is There a Need for New Evidence?Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2017
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Response to the Comment on "The Performance and Usability of a Factory-Calibrated Flash Glucose Monitoring System" by Bailey et al.2016
• Comment on
  The Performance and Usability of a Factory-Calibrated Flash Glucose Monitoring System.2015

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as