ArticleEuropean endocrinology2017
Is Continuous Glucose Monitoring Underappreciated in the UK?
Article in European endocrinology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Diabetes Healthcare Professionals Use Multiple Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data Indicators to Assess Glucose Management.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2020Article
- Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in People with Type 1 Diabetes: Perspectives of Two People with Diabetes and Physician Perspective.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInformation about continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) use in the UK is limited. We conducted an online survey of a representative sample of current CGM users in England, Scotland and Wales to address this deficit.
methodsThe 29-item online survey was conducted between 29 December 2016 and 25 January 2017. Persons with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and caregivers of T1D children/adolescents were recruited from mailing lists, using Nielsen and Harris Polling databases.
results315 patients and caregivers responded to the survey - 170 adult patients and 145 caregivers. Among respondents, 144 received full funding for CGM use, 72 received partial funding and 83 received no funding. Most reported improvements in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) (67.0%), fewer hypoglycaemia episodes (70.2%), improved hypoglycaemia awareness (77.5%) and better diabetes management (92.4%). Self-funders reported significantly higher CGM use (76.1%) than those who were fully funded (58.9%) and/or partially funded (65.9%), p=0.0008. Fewer than 50% of all respondents reported receiving guidance in interpreting CGM data from their diabetes care team; 30.1% of self-funders reported receiving no CGM support from their diabetes team compared with fully funded (2.8%) and partially funded (1.4%) respondents, p<0.0001.
conclusionsPatients with T1D and their caregivers are realising benefits from CGM use but are largely unsupported by the UK healthcare system.
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.