Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30349591›Full record

ReviewEuropean endocrinology2018

Self-measurement of Blood Glucose and Continuous Glucose Monitoring - Is There Only One Future?

Lutz Heinemann, Andreas Stuhr, Adam Brown, Guido Freckmann, Marc D Breton, Steven Russell, Lutz Heinemann

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European endocrinology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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.

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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Lutz HeinemannScience Consulting in Diabetes GmbH, Neuss, Germany.
Andreas StuhrAscensia Diabetes Care, NJ, US.
Adam BrownScience Consulting in Diabetes GmbH, Neuss, Germany.
Guido FreckmannScience Consulting in Diabetes GmbH, Neuss, Germany.
Marc D BretonScience Consulting in Diabetes GmbH, Neuss, Germany.
Steven RussellScience Consulting in Diabetes GmbH, Neuss, Germany.
Lutz HeinemannScience Consulting in Diabetes GmbH, Neuss, Germany.
Ascensia Diabetes Care (Switzerland) · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Monitoring glycaemic control in patients with diabetes has evolved dramatically over the past decades. The introduction of easy-to-use systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) utilising capillary blood samples has resulted in the availability of a wide range of systems, providing different measurement quality. Systems for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) - used mainly in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) - were made possible by the development of glucose sensors that measure glucose levels in the interstitial fluid (ISF) in the subcutaneous tissue of the skin. CGM readings might not correspond exactly to SMBG measurement results taken at the same time, especially during rapid changes in either blood glucose or ISF glucose levels. The mean absolute relative difference is the most popular method used for characterising the measurement performance of CGM systems. Unlike the International Organization for Standardization 15197:2013 criteria for SMBG systems, no accuracy standards for CGM systems exist. Measurement quality of CGM systems can vary based on several factors, limiting their safety and effective use in managing diabetes. Patients have to be trained adequately to make safe and efficient use of CGM systems (like with SMBG systems). Also, systems for CGM must be evaluated in terms of patient safety and the ability to provide accurate measurements regardless of the fluctuation of glucose levels. As new technological advancements in glucose monitoring are essential for improved management options of diabetes, such as automated insulin dosing systems, there is a need for a critical view of all such developments. It is likely that both, SMBG and CGM systems, will play important future roles in the treatment of diabetes.

Indexed as

Automated insulin dosing (AID) systemcontinuous glucose monitoring (CGM)mean absolute relative difference (MARD)self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG)

Identifiers

PMID30349591
PMCPMC6182926
OpenAlexW2891002540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.