ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2017
Analysis of "Seven Year Surveillance of the Clinical Performance of a Blood Glucose Test-Strip Product".
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The article titled "Seven Year Surveillance of the Clinical Performance of a Blood Glucose Test-Strip Product" by Setford and coworkers in this issue of Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology is an impressive study showing that over 7 years in three clinics, using multiple reagent lots, a total of 73 600 samples met the ISO 15197 2015 standard with no results in the D or E zones of a Parkes glucose meter error grid. Three requirements are suggested for a clinically acceptable glucose meter. The authors provide strong evidence for meeting two requirements but fail to provide summarized data about the number of nonnumeric results. Finally, the authors overstate some results, called "spin" by some which is not necessary. The superb results should stand on their own.
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.