Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30547683›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2019

Assessment of System Accuracy, Intermediate Measurement Precision, and Measurement Repeatability of a Blood Glucose Monitoring System Based on ISO 15197.

Nina Jendrike, Annette Baumstark, Stefan Pleus, Jochen Mende, Cornelia Haug, Guido Freckmann

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Getting More Information From Glucose Meter Evaluations.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2019
    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

6 authors.

Nina Jendrike1 Institut für Diabetes-Technologie, Forschungs- und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH an der Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Annette Baumstark1 Institut für Diabetes-Technologie, Forschungs- und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH an der Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Stefan Pleus1 Institut für Diabetes-Technologie, Forschungs- und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH an der Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4629-7754
Jochen Mende1 Institut für Diabetes-Technologie, Forschungs- und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH an der Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Cornelia Haug1 Institut für Diabetes-Technologie, Forschungs- und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH an der Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Guido Freckmann1 Institut für Diabetes-Technologie, Forschungs- und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH an der Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0406-9529

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnalytical quality of blood glucose monitoring systems (BGMS) is an important aspect for many diabetes patients. Sufficiently high analytical quality is required for adequate diabetes therapy.

methodsIn this study, system accuracy and measurement precision of a BGMS were assessed based on ISO 15197:2013. For system accuracy, this standard requires a specific glucose distribution and at least 95% of results obtained with the BGMS in capillary blood to fall within ±15 mg/dl or ±15% (at glucose concentrations <100 mg/dl or ≥100 mg/dl, respectively) of corresponding comparison method results, and at least 99% of results to be found within clinically acceptable consensus error grid (CEG) zones A and B. Based on ISO 15197:2013, intermediate measurement precision, using control solution, and measurement repeatability, using venous blood samples, were analyzed by calculation of standard deviations (SDs) and coefficients of variation (CV) at glucose concentrations <100 mg/dl or ≥100 mg/dl, respectively, although ISO 15197:2013 does not specify acceptance criteria.

resultsThe BGMS fulfilled system accuracy requirements with ≥99% of results within ±15 mg/dl or ±15% of the comparison method results, and 100% of results in CEG zones A and B. Intermediate measurement precision analysis showed SD ≤2.2 mg/dl and CV ≤2.3%. Analysis of measurement repeatability showed SD ≤2.1 mg/dl and CV ≤2.4%.

conclusionSystem accuracy requirements of ISO 15197:2013 were fulfilled by the BGMS. As ISO 15197:2013 does not specify precision requirements, precision analysis results were compared with those reported for other BGMS in the literature and found to be similar.

Indexed as

BiomarkersBlood GlucoseBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringCalibrationDiabetes MellitusHumansMaterials TestingPredictive Value of TestsReference StandardsReproducibility of ResultsBiomarkersBlood Glucoseintermediate measurement precisionISO 15197measurement repeatabilitysystem accuracy

Identifiers

PMID30547683
PMCPMC6399804

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.