Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27287421›Full record

Observational studyJournal of endocrinological investigation2016

Head-to-head comparison between flash and continuous glucose monitoring systems in outpatients with type 1 diabetes.

B Bonora, A Maran, S Ciciliot, A Avogaro, G P Fadini

Registry-linked trialAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of endocrinological investigation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04060732 (Feasibility and Safety of "Flash Glucose Monitoring-FGM" in an Adult and Selected Pediatric Population.), which is not on this map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
12.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT04060732 completednot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Feasibility and Safety of "Flash Glucose Monitoring-FGM" in an Adult and Selected Pediatric Population.

TypeobservationalSponsorAzienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di ParmaRan2017 to 2020Enrolled350ConditionsDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1ArmsFlash Glucose Monitoring-FGM
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 94 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Accuracy of Flash Glucose Monitoring in Hemodialysis Patients With and Without Diabetes Mellitus.Experimental and clinical endocrinology & diabetes : official journal, German Society of Endocrinology [and] German Diabetes Association · 2023
    Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

B BonoraDivision of Metabolic Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Padova, Via Giustiniani, 2, 35128, Padua, Italy.
A MaranDivision of Metabolic Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Padova, Via Giustiniani, 2, 35128, Padua, Italy.
S CiciliotDivision of Metabolic Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Padova, Via Giustiniani, 2, 35128, Padua, Italy.
A AvogaroDivision of Metabolic Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Padova, Via Giustiniani, 2, 35128, Padua, Italy.
G P FadiniDivision of Metabolic Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Padova, Via Giustiniani, 2, 35128, Padua, Italy. gianpaolo.fadini@unipd.it.
University of Padua · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeContinuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is being increasingly used in clinical practice. The flash glucose monitoring (FGM) and CGM are different systems of interstitial glucose recording. We aimed to determine the agreement between the factory-calibrated FGM FreeStyle Libre (FSL) and the gold-standard CGM Dexcom G4 Platinum (DG4P).

methodsWe analyzed data from n = 8 outpatients with type 1 diabetes, who wore the FSL and DG4P for up to 14 days during their habitual life. We aligned FSL and DG4P recordings to obtain paired glucose measures. We calculated correlation coefficients, mean absolute relative difference (MARD), percentages in Clarke error grid areas, time spent in hyperglycaemia, target glycaemia, or hypoglycaemia, as well as glucose variability with both sensors. Comparison with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) was also performed.

resultsPatients varied in terms of age, diabetes duration, and HbA1c (from 5.9 to 9.6 %). In the pooled analysis of 10,020 paired values, there was a good correlation between FSL and DG4P (r

conclusionsIn outpatients with type 1 diabetes, we found good agreement between the FSL and DG4P. No significant difference was detected in the estimation of clinical diagnostic parameters.

Indexed as

AdultBiomarkersBlood GlucoseBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringCalibrationDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1FemaleHumansHyperglycemiaHypoglycemiaMaleMiddle AgedOutpatientsPrognosisRetrospective StudiesBiomarkersBlood GlucoseCalibrationContinuous glucose monitoringHypoglycaemiaSensorsVariability

Identifiers

PMID27287421
OpenAlexW2418644768

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.