ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2023
Multicenter Evaluation Study Comparing a New Factory-Calibrated Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring System to Existing Flash Glucose Monitoring System.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines 2024 Diabetes Technologies: Glucose Monitoring.Hormone research in paediatrics · 2024Guideline
- International clinical opinion on transparency, standardisation, and calibration alignment in the performance evaluation of systems for continuous glucose monitoring.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Review
- Towards Standardization of CGM Performance Studies: The QUSS-CGM Questionnaire for Assessing User Satisfaction.Patient related outcome measures · 2025Article
- Performance Assessment of Three Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2024Article
- A Critical Discussion of Alert Evaluations in the Context of Continuous Glucose Monitoring System Performance.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2024Review
- Head-to-Head Evaluation of Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Automated Insulin Delivery Systems: Why are They not Used More Systematically?Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2024Article
- Evaluating the precision and reliability of real-time continuous glucose monitoring systems in ambulatory settings: a systematic review.Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism · 2024Review
- Clinical Performance Evaluation of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems: A Scoping Review and Recommendations for Reporting.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2023Article
- Analytical Performance of the Factory-Calibrated Flash Glucose Monitoring System FreeStyle Libre2Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- User experiences during the transition to calibration-free sensors with remote monitoring while using automated insulin delivery - a qualitative study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Analysis of "Multicenter Evaluation Study Comparing a New Factory-Calibrated Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring System to Existing Flash Glucose Monitoring System".Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study reports a clinical evaluation of AiDEX CGM system featuring a 14-day sensor, real-time glucose monitoring and factory-calibration. A multicenter, prospective, masked clinical study was conducted at with a total of 120 participants. Each participant wore 4 studied sensors and had one in-clinic visit for venous blood reference tests. 40 out of the 120 participants wore additional Abbott Libre sensors and performed at least 7 capillary BG tests daily for additional reference and comparison. Continuous glucose error grid analysis (CG-EGA) showed that AiDEX and Abbott Libre had good agreement with venous blood glucose, with 98.69% and 98.96% accurate readings, respectively. Overall MARD of AiDEX CGM systems was 9.08% when compared to venous blood reference and 10.1% when compared to finger capillary BG reference.
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.