ReviewJournal of diabetes science and technology2026
The Impact of Interfering Substances on Continuous Glucose Monitors: Part 4: Continuous Glucose Monitoring Interferents: In Vivo Performance, Clinical Implications and Future Standardization.
Review in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2026. 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.
- Implementing ADA 2026 diabetes technology recommendations: opportunities and challenges for quality improvement in real-world care.BMJ open quality · 2026Article
- Challenges of Wearable Biosensors and Ways to Overcome Them.Biosensors · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Presented is a series of narrative reviews that summarize published information regarding the effect or potential effect of interfering substances on the accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices. Whilst drawing together what is currently known regarding this topic, the future direction in this field and clinical implications posed by polypharmacy on CGM performance are considered. This fourth and final in this series of articles reviews the following topics: the benefits and drawbacks of conducting interfering substance studies in vitro versus in vivo; the balance between the cost and complexity of undertaking in vitro or in vivo studies to screen for potential interferences versus the clinical relevance of the findings; clinical factors influencing interferent behavior on CGM performance (pharmacokinetics and polypharmacy considerations); the need for standardization, including consideration of the metrological traceability of CGM readings, establishment of CGM analytical performance metrics and standardized CGM assessment procedures for measuring interferents.
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.