Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27170632›Full record

ReviewJournal of diabetes science and technology2016

Glucose Control in the ICU: A Continuing Story.

Jean-Charles Preiser, J Geoffrey Chase, Roman Hovorka, Jeffrey I Joseph, James S Krinsley, Christophe De Block, Thomas Desaive, Luc Foubert, Pierre Kalfon, Ulrike Pielmeier and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Inpatient Hyperglycemia Management and COVID-19.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2021
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Updates in Glycemic Management in the Hospital.Current diabetes reports · 2019
    Review
  18. Advancing the Use of CGM Devices in a Non-ICU Setting.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2019
    Review
  19. Glucose Management Technologies for the Critically Ill.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2019
    Review
  20. Glucose control in the ICU.Current opinion in anaesthesiology · 2019
    Review
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

12 authors.

Jean-Charles PreiserDepartment of Intensive Care, Erasme Hospital, Université libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium Jean-Charles.Preiser@erasme.ulb.ac.be.
J Geoffrey ChaseDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Centre for Bio-Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Roman HovorkaUniversity of Cambridge Metabolic Research Laboratories, Level 4, Wellcome Trust-MRC Institute of Metabolic Science, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK.
Jeffrey I JosephDepartment of Anesthesiology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
James S KrinsleyDivision of Critical Care, Department of Medicine, Stamford Hospital, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, Stamford, CT, USA.
Christophe De BlockDepartment of Endocrinology, Diabetology and Metabolism, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium.
Thomas DesaiveGIGA-Cardiovascular Sciences, Université de Liège, Liège, Belgium.
Luc FoubertDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, OLV Clinic, Aalst, Belgium.
Pierre KalfonService de Réanimation polyvalente, Hôpital Louis Pasteur, CH de Chartres, Chartres, France.
Ulrike PielmeierDepartment of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg Øst, Denmark.
Tom Van HerpeDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine-Department of Electrical Engineering (STADIUS), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Jan WernermanKarolinska University Hospital Huddinge and Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the present era of near-continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and automated therapeutic closed-loop systems, measures of accuracy and of quality of glucose control need to be standardized for licensing authorities and to enable comparisons across studies and devices. Adequately powered, good quality, randomized, controlled studies are needed to assess the impact of different CGM devices on the quality of glucose control, workload, and costs. The additional effects of continuing glucose control on the general floor after the ICU stay also need to be investigated. Current algorithms need to be adapted and validated for CGM, including effects on glucose variability and workload. Improved collaboration within the industry needs to be encouraged because no single company produces all the necessary components for an automated closed-loop system. Combining glucose measurement with measurement of other variables in 1 sensor may help make this approach more financially viable.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsMonitoring, PhysiologicBlood GlucoseBlood Glucosecontinuous glucose controldiabetesintensive caretime in band

Identifiers

PMID27170632
PMCPMC5094326

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.