ReviewEuropean endocrinology2018
Self-measurement of Blood Glucose and Continuous Glucose Monitoring - Is There Only One Future?
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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of an isotope dilution gas chromatography - mass spectrometry candidate reference measurement procedure for glucose in human serum.Journal of mass spectrometry and advances in the clinical lab · 2025Article
- Enhancing Health Equity and Patient Engagement in Diabetes Care: Technology-Aided Continuous Glucose Monitoring Pilot Implementation Project.JMIR diabetes · 2025Article
- Accuracy enhancement of metabolic index-based blood glucose estimation with a screening process for low-quality data.Journal of biomedical optics · 2024Article
- Non-invasive blood glucose estimation method based on the phase delay between oxy- and deoxyhemoglobin using visible and near-infrared spectroscopy.Journal of biomedical optics · 2024Article
- Implantable Electrochemical Microsensors for In Vivo Monitoring of Animal Physiological Information.Nano-micro letters · 2023Review
- Stratification of Patients with Diabetes Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring Profiles and Machine Learning.Health data science · 2022Article
- Automated Insulin Dosing Systems or Automated Insulin Delivery Systems? It is Time for Consistency.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2021Article
- Simple Post-Processing of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Measurements Improves Endpoints in Clinical Trials.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2020Article
- Continuous Glucose Monitoring Sensors for Diabetes Management: A Review of Technologies and Applications.Diabetes & metabolism journal · 2019Review
- Differences of FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring System and Finger Pricks on Clinical Characteristics and Glucose Monitoring Satisfactions in Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Pump.Clinical medicine insights. Endocrinology and diabetes · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.