ArticleJMIR diabetes2019
Impact of New Technologies for Middle-Aged and Older Patients: In-Depth Interviews With Type 2 Diabetes Patients Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring.
Article in JMIR diabetes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Continuous GLUCOse Monitoring System With a SENSor Compared to Fingerstick Glucose Monitoring in Surgical Wards (GLUCOSENS)
Experience With the Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) Devices in People With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Continuous glucose monitoring in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review of barriers and opportunities for care improvement.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2025Pooled it
- Patient experiences of continuous glucose monitoring and sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy for diabetes: A systematic review of qualitative studies.Journal of diabetes · 2023Pooled it
- Lifestyle Intervention With Smartphone App and isCGM for People at High Risk of Type 2 Diabetes: Randomized Trial.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2024Trial
- Continuous Glucose Monitoring With Low-Carbohydrate Nutritional Coaching to Improve Type 2 Diabetes Control: Randomized Quality Improvement Program.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Trial
- Association of liver elastography measurements with poor glycaemic control in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes.Archives of endocrinology and metabolism · 2025Observational
- A Qualitative Study of Older Adult Perspectives on Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Type 2 Diabetes.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Feasibility and acceptability of the use of flash glucose monitoring encountered by Indigenous Australians with type 2 diabetes mellitus: initial experiences from a pilot study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- A Team-Based Training for Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Diabetes Care: Mixed Methods Pilot Implementation Study in Primary Care Practices.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Patient Satisfaction with Professional Continuous Glucose Monitoring in a Diverse Family Medicine Clinic: A Pilot Study.Innovations in pharmacy · 2022Article
- Continuous Glucose Monitoring With Low-Carbohydrate Diet Coaching in Adults With Prediabetes: Mixed Methods Pilot Study.JMIR diabetes · 2020Article
- Glycemic Status Assessment by the Latest Glucose Monitoring Technologies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundContinuous glucose monitoring (CGM) uses subcutaneous sensors and records the average interstitial sensor current every 5 min in the recorder; data are subsequently exported to a computer 4 to 7 days later when calibration with self-measured blood glucose is made retrospectively. How middle-aged and older patients perceive the added technology intervention is not clear.
objectiveThe study aimed to understand the factors associated with the adoption of new technology in diabetes care, to understand the feelings and behaviors while using it, and to determine the changes in attitudes and behavior after completing the use of the new technology at the 3-month follow-up.
methodsMiddle-aged and older type 2 diabetes patients who had received professional continuous glucose monitoring (iPro 2 [Medtronic]) were invited for semistructured in-depth interviews on the day of the CGM sensor removal and at 3 months after CGM-based counseling. A phenomenography approach was used to analyze the interview data.
resultsA total of 20 type 2 diabetes patients (aged 53 to 72 years, 13 males and 7 females, 4 to 40 years duration of diabetes, mean glycated hemoglobin 8.54% [SD 0.71%]) completed 2 sections of semistructured in-depth interviews. Physician guidance and participant motivation toward problem solving were found to be factors associated with adoption of the device. Participants indicated that technology can be a reminder, a supervisor, and a visualizer of blood glucose, all of which are helpful for disease management. However, CGM is somewhat inconvenient, and some participants also reported that the provision of this new technology might be a hint of disease progression. There was a higher percentage of women compared with men who reported that CGM can be a reminder or a supervisor to help them with diet control.
conclusionsPhysician guidance and participants' degree of motivation are keys to adopting new technology in the case of middle-aged and older adults. Although the CGM sensor may cause inconvenience to patients on their limited body movement when wearing the device, it is helpful for diet control and is an effective behavioral modification tool that offers support, especially in the case of women.
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.