SynthesisJournal of general internal medicine2023
The Efficacy and Frequency of Self-monitoring of Blood Glucose in Non-insulin-Treated T2D Patients: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of general internal medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy of continuous glucose monitoring in comparison to self-blood glucose monitoring in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus under insulin treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC endocrine disorders · 2026Pooled it
- Blood Glucose Monitoring Expert Group and Best Practice Recommendation-FITTER BiG.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2026Review
- Practices for glucose measurement with a glucometer in a population of diabetic patients. An observational study.Scientific reports · 2026Observational
- 7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2026.Diabetes care · 2026Review
- Review
- Impact of national reimbursement policy supporting test strips on glycemic control in people with insulin-treated diabetes: retrospective cohort study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Mobile App-Assisted Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in Type 2 Diabetes in Ningbo, China: 12-Month Retrospective Cohort Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Article
- Construction and validation of a risk prediction model for hypoglycemia in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- The Iranian Consensus on Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose: An Expert Consensus.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2025Article
- Unleashing the Potential of Blood Glucose Monitoring Data With the Ambulatory Glucose Profile Report.Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSelf-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is a useful tool in diabetes management, but its efficacy and optimal application in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients treated without insulin have been controversial. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of SMBG in controlling blood glucose levels in non-insulin-treated T2D patients and to determine the optimal frequency and the most appropriate population to benefit from SMBG.
methodsEligible publications from January 2000 to April 2022 were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. Randomized controlled trials comparing SMBG with no SMBG or structured SMBG (S-SMBG, SMBG with defined timing and frequency of glucose measurements) were included. Meta-analyses and sub-analyses were performed to assess the efficacy, optimal frequency, and most appropriate population for SMBG. Risk of bias was assessed regarding randomization, allocation sequence concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective outcome reporting, and other biases.
resultsTwenty-two studies involving 6204 participants were identified, including 17 comparing SMBG with no SMBG and 4 comparing SMBG with S-SMBG. SMBG reduced HbA1c (MD -0.30%, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.17) compared with no SMBG, and S-SMBG performed better than SMBG (MD -0.23%, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.07). Subgroup analyses showed that HbA1c control was better with SMBG at 8-11 times weekly (MD -0.35%, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.20) compared with other frequencies and with lifestyle adjustments (MD -0.37%, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.23) than with no adjustments. No significant differences in HbA1c were observed between baseline HbA1c subgroups (≤ 8% and > 8%, P = 0.63) and between diabetes duration subgroups (≤ 6 years and > 6 years, P = 0.72), respectively. DISCUSSION: SMBG was effective for controlling HbA1c in non-insulin-treated T2D patients, although lacking detailed monitoring design. Better outcomes were seen with SMBG at 8-11 times weekly and lifestyle adjustment based on SMBG results.
trial registrationPROSPERO (CRD42021285604).
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.