ReviewJournal of diabetes science and technology2024
Drug Interference in Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose and the Impact on Patient Safety: We Can Only Guard Against What We Are Looking for.
Review 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of the latest CLSI EP guidelines in light-initiated chemiluminescent assay for testosterone.Journal of medical biochemistry · 2026Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Self-monitoring of blood glucose is a key aspect of diabetes management. Depending on the technology used, however, various substances can jeopardize the reliability of the measurements and precipitate complications with potentially life-threatening consequences when blood glucose was deemed well-controlled. As such, it is important for all involved to be aware of those factors. Officially suggested procedures for testing and alternatives have each their own advantages and limitations, and interferences may be found beyond the substances to be tested provided by the various pertinent institutions. This article reviews these pros and cons and illustrates how interference testing beyond established standards contributes to patient safety. Once identified, interfering substances are included in product labeling and healthcare professionals and users need to be trained to be aware of these risks.
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.