Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28924562›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes and metabolic disorders2017

Assessment of analytical performance of glucose meter in pediatric age group at tertiary care referral hospital.

Mohit Vijay Rojekar, Vandana Kumawat, Jayesh Panot, Surekha Khedkar, Arati Adhe-Rojekar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Mohit Vijay RojekarRajiv Gandhi Medical College, Thane, India.
Vandana KumawatRajiv Gandhi Medical College, Thane, India.
Jayesh PanotRajiv Gandhi Medical College, Thane, India.
Surekha KhedkarRajiv Gandhi Medical College, Thane, India.
Arati Adhe-RojekarPD Hinduja National Hospital and Research Center, Mumbai, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlucometers are the excellent tools for self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). They are important especially in the circumstances where continuous monitoring is mandatory and at decision making levels. Tight glycemic control protocols are important for preventing the ill effects of fluctuating glucose levels. This increases the use of glucometers in various healthcare settings. As technology advances, glucometers are getting better in terms of quality of results. But still some lacunae are there.

methodsPresent study was conducted in the tertiary care referral hospital. One hundred twenty five patients were recruited from pediatric wards. Bland-Altman plot, Parke error grid and Surveillance error grid analysis were used for comparing results of glucose meter with that of standard laboratory method.

resultsIt is found that there is significant difference between the results by two methods. Though minimal but glucose meter results deviate from the results of standard lab method. This will affect the overall patient care especially in emergency conditions.

conclusionsThis study is the first of its kind as no similar studies have been reported in the pediatric population. For effective use of glucose meter it should give as accurate as possible estimate of actual glucose levels. Results should not only be accurate but also precise without which critical errors may be possible. We recommend that for any glucose meter there should be regular maintenance as well as calibration is to be done. So that agreement with reference laboratory method is maintained and effective medical decisions are made.

Indexed as

GlucometerParke error gridSurveillance error grid

Identifiers

PMID28924562
PMCPMC5598041

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.