Observational studyJournal of diabetes science and technology2024
Longitudinal Digital Glucometric Benchmarking to Evaluate the Impact of Institutional Diabetes Care Initiatives in Adults With Diabetes Mellitus Over the 2016-2020 Period.
Observational study in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital technologies and clinical decision support tools available for diabetes triage in the inpatient setting: A systematic literature review.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026Pooled it
- Temporal trends in glycaemia and hospital outcomes in three metropolitan Australian hospitals, 2017-2024.Internal medicine journal · 2026Observational
- "Mellitus Metrics"-Systematic Review of Glucometric Reporting within Hospital-Based Diabetes Studies (2006-2023).Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2026Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile glucometric benchmarking has been used to compare glucose management between institutions, the value of longitudinal intra-institution benchmarking to assess quality improvement changes is not established.
methodsA prospective six-month observational study (October 2019-March 2020 inclusive) of inpatients with diabetes or newly detected hyperglycemia admitted to eight medical and surgical wards at the Royal Melbourne Hospital. Networked blood glucose (BG) meters were used to collect capillary BG levels. Outcomes were measures of glycemic control assessed by mean and threshold glucometric measures and comparison with published glucometric benchmarks. Intra-institution comparison was over the 2016-2020 period.
resultsIn all, 620 admissions (588 unique individuals) met the inclusion criteria, contributing 15 164 BG results over 4023 admission-days. Compared with the 2016 cohort from the same institution, there was increased BG testing (3.8 [SD = 2.2) vs 3.3 [SD = 1.7] BG measurements per patient-day,
conclusionsComprehensive digital-based glucometric benchmarking confirmed institutional quality improvement changes were followed by reduced hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia in a five-year comparison. Longitudinal glucometric benchmarking enables evaluation and validation of changes to institutional diabetes care management practices.
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.