Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31625413›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2020

Comparison of Interstitial Fluid Glucose Levels Obtained by Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Flash Glucose Monitoring in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Undergoing Hemodialysis.

Takahiro Yajima, Hiroshi Takahashi, Keigo Yasuda

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Diabetes and Glucose Management in People on Hemodialysis.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Accuracy of Flash Glucose Monitoring in Hemodialysis Patients With and Without Diabetes Mellitus.Experimental and clinical endocrinology & diabetes : official journal, German Society of Endocrinology [and] German Diabetes Association · 2023
    Article
  16. Flash glucose monitoring system in special situations.Archives of endocrinology and metabolism · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Making sense of glucose sensors in end-stage kidney disease: A review.Frontiers in clinical diabetes and healthcare · 2022
    Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Takahiro YajimaDepartment of Nephrology, Matsunami General Hospital, Gifu, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-8180-5614
Hiroshi TakahashiDivision of Medical Statistics, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Aichi, Japan.
Keigo YasudaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Matsunami General Hospital, Gifu, Japan.
Matsunami General Hospital · JPFujita Health University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe accuracy of flash glucose monitoring (FGM, FreeStyle Libre Pro [FSL-Pro]) remains unclear in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) undergoing hemodialysis.

methodsWe assessed 13 patients with T2DM undergoing hemodialysis. They simultaneously underwent FGM, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM, iPro2), and self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG).

resultsParkes error grid analysis against SMBG showed that 49.0% and 51.0% of interstitial fluid glucose (ISFG) levels measured using FGM and 93.3% and 6.7% of those measured using CGM fell into zones A and B, respectively. Mean absolute relative difference (MARD) against SMBG for FGM was significantly higher than that for CGM (19.5% ± 13.2% vs 8.1% ± 7.6%,

conclusionsFlash glucose monitoring may be clinically acceptable. Average ISFG levels were lower with FGM than with CGM, and MARDs were higher for hypoglycemia and euglycemia in patients with T2DM undergoing hemodialysis.

Indexed as

Renal DialysisAgedBiomarkersBlood GlucoseBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Equipment DesignExtracellular FluidFemaleHumansKidney DiseasesMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, AmbulatoryPredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsBiomarkersBlood Glucoseflash glucose monitoringFreeStyle Libre Prohemodialysisinterstitial fluid glucose leveliPro2type 2 diabetes mellitus

Identifiers

PMID31625413
PMCPMC7645125
OpenAlexW2981142390

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.