ArticleAdvances in laboratory medicine2024
Use of point-of-care glucometers during an oral glucose tolerance test in children for prediabetes and diabetes diagnosis: a comparison study.
Article in Advances in laboratory medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
- Article
- A High-accuracy and compliance-driven paradigm for pediatric type 2 diabetes screening based on simplified OGTT --- a multicenter study.BMC endocrine disorders · 2026Article
- Reply to: "Considerations about the use of glucometers for testing glucose tolerance".Advances in laboratory medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Despite clinical guidelines do not recommend the use of point-of-care testing (POCT) glucometers for diagnostic purposes yet, the analytical performance is continuously improving. Thus, we evaluate the technical accuracy and clinical concordance of POCT glucometers during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in children for prediabetes and diabetes diagnosis in a comparison study. Methods: Pediatric patients with an OGTT indication who attended the Diabetes Unit between December 2020 and September 2021 were recruited for this prospective observational study. During the functional test, glycaemia was immediately measured in venous blood using two glucometers (unconnected and connected) and sent to the central laboratory. Results: The study included 98 patients. There was a high correlation between the glucometers and the central laboratory (Pearson correlation coefficient=0.912 and 0.950, for unconnected and connected glucometer, respectively). The median OGTT turnaround time (TAT) was significantly decreased (connected glucometer: 2.02 h [interquartile range, 2.00-2.07], central laboratory: 11.63 h [6.09-25.80]), with similar overall cost. The diagnostic concordance between connected glucometer and the central laboratory was 71.1 % (95 % confidence interval (CI) 61.5-79.2). The clinical decision would have been the same in the 92.8 % of the cases, but treatment would have not been indicated in 4 patients (4.1 %). Conclusions: POCT glucometers have demonstrated a high correlation and an acceptable diagnostic concordance with the central laboratory during an OGTT, as well the connected device offers a significant decrease in TAT, without increasing costs. However, as severe clinical impact could happen, POCT glucometers may not be used for diagnosis yet.
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.