ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2017
Clinical Impact of Blood Glucose Monitoring Accuracy: An In-Silico Study.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- User Performance Evaluation and System Accuracy Assessment of Four Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems With Color Coding of Measurement Results.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2024Article
- Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus.Diabetes care · 2023Review
- Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus.Clinical chemistry · 2023Article
- Impact of Blood Glucose Monitoring System Accuracy on Clinical Decision Making for Diabetes Management.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2023Article
- Clinical Study of a High Accuracy Green Design Blood Glucose Monitor Using an Innovative Optical Transmission Absorbance System.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2022Article
- The Effectiveness of Insulin Pump Therapy Versus Multiple Daily Injections in Children With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus in a Specialized Center in Riyadh.Clinical medicine insights. Endocrinology and diabetes · 2022Article
- Analysis of "Use of Blood Glucose Meters Featuring Color Range Indicators Improves Glycemic Control and Patients With Diabetes in Comparison to Blood Glucose Meters Without Color (ACCENTS Study)".Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2018Article
- Diabetes Technological Revolution: Winners and Losers?Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2018Article
- Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) or Blood Glucose Monitoring (BGM): Interactions and Implications.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2018Article
- The Financial Impact of Inaccurate Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2018Article
- The UVA/Padova Type 1 Diabetes Simulator Goes From Single Meal to Single Day.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with diabetes rely on blood glucose (BG) monitoring devices to manage their condition. As some self-monitoring devices are becoming more and more accurate, it becomes critical to understand the relationship between system accuracy and clinical outcomes, and the potential benefits of analytical accuracy.
methodsWe conducted a 30-day in-silico study in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) patients using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy and a variety of BG meters, using the FDA-approved University of Virginia (UVA)/Padova Type 1 Simulator. We used simulated meter models derived from the published characteristics of 43 commercial meters. By controlling random events in each parallel run, we isolated the differences in clinical performance that are directly associated with the meter characteristics.
resultsA meter's systematic bias has a significant and inverse effect on HbA1c ( P < .01), while also affecting the number of severe hypoglycemia events. On the other hand, error, defined as the fraction of measurements beyond 5% of the true value, is a predictor of severe hypoglycemia events ( P < .01), but in the absence of bias has a nonsignificant effect on average glycemia (HbA1c). Both bias and error have significant effects on total daily insulin (TDI) and the number of necessary glucose measurements per day ( P < .01). Furthermore, these relationships can be accurately modeled using linear regression on meter bias and error.
conclusionsTwo components of meter accuracy, bias and error, clearly affect clinical outcomes. While error has little effect on HbA1c, it tends to increase episodes of severe hypoglycemia. Meter bias has significant effects on all considered metrics: a positive systemic bias will reduce HbA1c, but increase the number of severe hypoglycemia attacks, TDI use, and number of fingersticks per day.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.