Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34599607›Full record

ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine2021

Evaluation of a flash glucose monitoring system in nondiabetic dogs with rapidly changing blood glucose concentrations.

Leigh A Howard, Jonathan A Lidbury, Nicholas Jeffery, Shannon E Washburn, Carly A Patterson

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study, Veterinary
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Leigh A HowardDepartment of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.
Jonathan A LidburyDepartment of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5107-4577
Nicholas JefferyDepartment of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.
Shannon E WashburnDepartment of Veterinary Physiology and Pharmacology, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.
Carly A PattersonDepartment of Veterinary Physiology and Pharmacology, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1087-7880
Texas College · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA flash glucose monitoring system (FGMS; FreeStyle Libre) is useful for monitoring hypoglycemic dogs with diabetes.

objectiveTo assess the utility of this FGMS in dogs with induced hypoglycemia and rapid fluctuations in blood glucose (BG) concentrations. ANIMALS: Twenty-four apparently healthy research (n = 10) and teaching (n = 14) dogs.

methodsProspective, observational study performed in tandem with a teaching laboratory. Regular insulin was administered to dogs and resulting hypoglycemia was corrected. Before insulin administration and every 10 minutes over a 90-minute period, serial measurements of interstitial glucose (IG) with FGMS and BG with a portable blood glucose meter (PBGM) and clinical chemistry analyzer concentrations were made. Portable blood glucose meter and FGMS readings were compared to that of the clinical chemistry analyzer. Analytical and clinical accuracy were assessed using ISO 15197:2013 criteria, including Parkes error grid analysis.

resultsThe proportions of readings in the low BG range (BG <100 mg/dL) for which the test method measurement was within ±15 mg/dL of the reference BG for the PBGM and FGMS were 81.7% (161/197) and 39.1% (72/184), respectively. The proportions of readings for the PBGM and FGMS, which were not likely to affect clinical outcome according to Parkes error grid analysis, were 97.9% (233/238) and 80.1% (177/221), respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: In this model, there was limited agreement between the FGMS and reference standard BG measurements. The FGMS (measuring IG concentrations) was compared to peripheral BG concentrations, not brain-tissue glucose concentrations, and failed to reliably detect hypoglycemia.

Indexed as

Blood Glucose Self-MonitoringDog DiseasesAnimalsBlood GlucoseDogsGlucoseProspective StudiesBlood GlucoseGlucosedogFreeStyle Librehypoglycemiainterstitial glucose

Identifiers

PMID34599607
PMCPMC8692193
OpenAlexW3202147320

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.