ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2019
Impact of Human Factors Testing on Medical Device Design: Validation of an Automated CGM Sensor Applicator.
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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Characterizing Behaviors That Influence the Implementation of Digital-Based Interventions in Health Care: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Comparisons of Fifth-, Sixth-, and Seventh-Generation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2024Review
- Usability and Teachability of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices in Older Adults and Diabetes Educators: Task Analysis and Ease-of-Use Survey.JMIR human factors · 2022Article
- Input of Patients for New Diabetes Technology Products.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2021Article
- The Lifebox Surgical Headlight Project: engineering, testing, and field assessment in a resource-constrained setting.The British journal of surgery · 2020Article
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
Improving user engagement with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is considered a major requirement for achieving optimal treatment efficacy. Human factors testing is needed to ensure that CGM product designs and requisite training simplify the user experience and enhance usability and patient safety. Dexcom, Inc, recently introduced a novel, "one-button" automatic sensor applicator (ASA) for use with the Dexcom G6 (rtCGM) system. The device was developed utilizing all phases of the human factors testing process. We recruited eight certified diabetes educators from independent health care institutions to conduct a comparative ease-of-use analysis to confirm the usability of the ASA. Participants judged the instructions and device to be easier to use than the previous sensor applicator.
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.