ArticleActa anaesthesiologica Scandinavica2025
Effects of Continuous Versus Intermittent Glucose Monitoring in Intensive Care Unit Patients: Protocol for a Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.
Article in Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of Continuous Versus Intermittent Glucose Monitoring in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of Continuous Versus Intermittent Glucose Monitoring in Intensive Care Unit Patients: Protocol for a Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 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
backgroundGlucose management in intensive care unit (ICU) patients is challenging, and dysglycemia is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) could be a potential tool to improve clinical and glycemic outcomes compared with current practice which relies on intermittent glucose measurements.
aimThe aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the effects of CGM compared with point of care (POC) glucose measurements on clinical patient-important and glycemic outcomes in ICU patients.
methodsThis protocol is based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guideline. We will include all randomized clinical trials in ICU patients. The primary outcome is mortality at the longest follow-up, and the main-secondary outcome is the number of hypoglycemic events. Additional outcomes include both patient-important and glycemic outcomes. We will systematically search: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Web of Science Core Collection. We will assess risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and conduct a Trial Sequential Analysis for the primary and main-secondary outcome. Clinical heterogeneity will be assessed using the Clinical Diversity in meta-analyses tool, and the certainty of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. DISCUSSION: This systematic review with meta-analysis will provide an updated overview and synthesis of the effect of CGM versus POC glucose monitoring to inform clinical practice and future 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.