ArticleJMIR diabetes2026
Use of the GTT@home Oral Glucose Tolerance Test Kit in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Performance Evaluation Study.
Article in JMIR diabetes, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) remains the optimal diagnostic test for use in pregnancy but needs to be performed in the clinical setting. The GTT@home OGTT device offers the potential to enable patients to perform the test at home using capillary blood samples. Objective: This study aimed to determine the accuracy of the GTT@home device compared to the routine National Health Service laboratory reference method using blood samples during an OGTT from pregnant women at high risk of developing gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Methods: A total of 65 women (aged >18 y), at high risk for GDM (per the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines) were recruited for this performance evaluation. Following an overnight fast, participants went for a 75-g OGTT. Fasting and 2-hour capillary glucose levels were measured using the GTT@home device with corresponding venous samples measured in the laboratory. Results: The complete data for analysis was available for 61/65 devices. The overall bias for the GTT@home device was +0.16 mmol/L. Correlation analysis of the clinical performance of the two methods using a surveillance error grid showed 79.8% of results in the lowest, 16.9% in the "slight, lower" and 2.4% in the "slight, higher" risk categories. Only 0.8% were "moderate, lower" risk, and none were in any higher risk categories. There was agreement in the classification in 54/61 cases. The GTT@home device under-classified 2 cases and over-classified 5 cases. Conclusions: The GTT@home device worked well in a controlled, antenatal clinical setting. Differences in classification observed were generally due to small differences in glucose values close to the diagnostic cut-offs. The GTT@home device shows promise for home testing of glucose tolerance in pregnant women.
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.