ArticleDiabetes care2025
Associations of CGM Metrics With Stimulated C-Peptide Measures in Youth With Recent-Onset Type 1 Diabetes.
Article in Diabetes care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Relationship between participant-reported outcomes, residual beta cell function and metabolic parameters in youth with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes.Diabetologia · 2026Trial
- Glycaemic Variability and C-Peptide in Bangladeshi Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults With Diabetes: A Prospective Study.Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveContinuous glucose monitoring (CGM) measures could be a surrogate for stimulated C-peptide outcomes in type 1 diabetes trials. RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsCGM and mixed-meal tolerance test-derived C-peptide measures at time points out to 52 weeks after diagnosis were compared in 103 children.
resultsAt 52 weeks, CGM metrics moderately correlated with C-peptide area under the curve. The highest Spearman correlations were for time-in-range 70-180 mg/dL, time <70 mg/dL, and glucose coefficient of variation (0.45, -0.33, and -0.58, respectively; the multivariate model using these three metrics had a slightly higher correlation of 0.63). For predicting peak C-peptide concentrations ≥0.2 pmol/mL, this combination had a sensitivity of 68.4% and specificity of 75%.
conclusionsCGM measures correlated with stimulated C-peptide measures; however, the strength of the correlations and sensitivity and specificity of CGM-derived measures were not great enough to replace C-peptide measures in clinical trials.
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.