ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2024
The Diabetes Technology Society Error Grid and Trend Accuracy Matrix for Glucose Monitors.
Article 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 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical validation of continuous glucose monitoring in glycemic management of critically ill sepsis patients: A prospective randomized clinical study.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Trial
- Pediatric Inpatient Continuous Glucose Monitor Accuracy by Sensor Wear Day, Hospital Day, and Glucose Rate of Change.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2026Article
- Performance, Safety and Usability of a Third-Generation Continuous Glucose Monitoring System in a Pediatric Population: Results From a Prospective, Multicenter Study.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2026Article
- Article
- Advances in diabetes technology: clinical implications, limitations, and future perspectives.Hormones (Athens, Greece) · 2026Review
- Nanostructured electrode materials and flexible-substrate engineering for wearable multi-analyte biosensors in diabetes monitoring and personalized care: a comprehensive review.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2026Review
- Decision accuracy of simultaneously used real-time CGM versus intermittently scanned CGM around exercise in type 1 diabetes: A secondary analysis of the ULTRAFLEXI-1 study.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026Article
- Accuracy and reliability of a continuous glucose monitoring system with a focus on hypoglycaemia.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Article
- Performance of three simultaneously used rtCGM systems around a physically active weekend camp in adults with type 1 diabetes: A prospective lab and real-world study.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Article
- Accuracy of Dexcom G6 Pro and G7 Continuous Glucose Monitors in Patients Treated with Maintenance Dialysis.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2026Article
- Accuracy and feasibility of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in early postoperative intensive care after liver transplantation.Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism · 2026Article
- Accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring during noncardiac surgery: a prospective, blinded observational multicentre cohort study.British journal of anaesthesia · 2025Observational
- Evaluation of commercial point-of-care glucometers for detection and monitoring of neonatal hypoglycemia in resource-constrained settings.BMC pediatrics · 2025Article
- Digital Twins for Personalized Medicine Require Epidemiological Data and Mathematical Modeling: Viewpoint.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Performance of the DEXCOM G7 CGM system during and after major surgery.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Article
- Accuracy of Glucose Trends by Subcutaneous Continuous Monitoring vs Intermittent Arterial Measurements in Critically Ill Patients.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2025Article
- Consensus statement on standardizing CGM evaluation metrics in Latin America: an expert approach.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2025Article
- Hybrid closed loop technology in emergency surgery in a person with type 1 diabetes.Anaesthesia reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
94 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAn error grid compares measured versus reference glucose concentrations to assign clinical risk values to observed errors. Widely used error grids for blood glucose monitors (BGMs) have limited value because they do not also reflect clinical accuracy of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs).
methodsDiabetes Technology Society (DTS) convened 89 international experts in glucose monitoring to (1) smooth the borders of the Surveillance Error Grid (SEG) zones and create a user-friendly tool-the DTS Error Grid; (2) define five risk zones of clinical point accuracy (A-E) to be identical for BGMs and CGMs; (3) determine a relationship between DTS Error Grid percent in Zone A and mean absolute relative difference (MARD) from analyzing 22 BGM and nine CGM accuracy studies; and (4) create trend risk categories (1-5) for CGM trend accuracy.
resultsThe DTS Error Grid for point accuracy contains five risk zones (A-E) with straight-line borders that can be applied to both BGM and CGM accuracy data. In a data set combining point accuracy data from 18 BGMs, 2.6% of total data pairs equally moved from Zones A to B and vice versa (SEG compared with DTS Error Grid). For every 1% increase in percent data in Zone A, the MARD decreased by approximately 0.33%. We also created a DTS Trend Accuracy Matrix with five trend risk categories (1-5) for CGM-reported trend indicators compared with reference trends calculated from reference glucose.
conclusionThe DTS Error Grid combines contemporary clinician input regarding clinical point accuracy for BGMs and CGMs. The DTS Trend Accuracy Matrix assesses accuracy of CGM trend indicators.
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.