ArticleCureus2021
Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose for Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in Primary Care: A Single-Centre, 10-Year Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Population attributable fraction of associated factors to adherence to blood glucose self-monitoring in diabetic type 2 patients treated with insulin or sulfonylureas/meglitinides: The results of DiaCare study in Iran.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Article
- Tuning the Localized Microenvironment near a Continuous Glucose Meter to Ensure Monitoring Accuracy and Longevity by Plasma-Induced Grafting Zwitterionic Brushes.ACS sensors · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background While type 1 diabetics often require self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), the evidence for tight blood glucose monitoring in non-insulin treated type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients is limited. In addition to its lack of cost-effectiveness, unnecessary blood glucose monitoring may also result in anxiety and decreased quality of life. In this retrospective audit, we assessed SMBG prescribing practice at one general practice against guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Methods A systematic search of T2DM patients diagnosed at a general practice in London, United Kingdom, in the last 10 years was undertaken. A total of 146 patients fulfilled these criteria, of which 100 patients were randomly selected for inclusion in this audit. Medical notes were reviewed and collated for analysis. Results Only 85% of patients with T2DM were being managed in accordance with the NICE guidelines on SMBG, while 15% were not. It was more common for patients who did not need monitoring to be inappropriately prescribed SMBG (10%) than it was for patients who needed monitoring to be under-prescribed SMBG (5%). The reasons for prescribing SMBG were often left undocumented. Conclusion Adherence to the NICE guidelines is subpar. Recommended solutions include educating healthcare professionals involved in the prescribing of SMBGs, regular reviews of the continued necessity of SMBG, and digital alerts on e-prescribing systems.
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.