Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42029709›Full record

ArticleDiabetologia2026

Updated glucose management indicator (GMI) better aligns with HbA

Richard M Bergenstal, Yongjin Xu, Timothy C Dunn, Pratik Choudhary, Ramzi A Ajjan

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetologia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Richard M BergenstalInternational Diabetes Center, HealthPartners Institute, Minneapolis, MN, USA. richard.bergenstal@parknicollet.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9050-5584
Yongjin XuClinical Affairs, Abbott Diabetes Care, Alameda, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9446-8402
Timothy C DunnClinical Affairs, Abbott Diabetes Care, Alameda, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3487-2504
Pratik ChoudharyDiabetes Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7635-4735
Ramzi A AjjanThe LIGHT Laboratories, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1636-3725

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aims/hypothesisThe continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)-derived glucose management indicator (GMI) is valuable to people with diabetes, and healthcare professionals and organisations for assessing overall glucose levels, optimising management plans. However, the current GMI can both over- and underestimate HbA

methodsAn updated GMI (uGMI) model based on physiological processes was evaluated using clinical trial and real-world data. The empirical relationship between average glucose (AG) and HbA

resultsIn 18,860 individuals with 26,647 AG-HbA CONCLUSIONS/

interpretationCompared with the CGM-derived GMI, the uGMI provides more accurate and consistent agreement with HbA

Indexed as

Blood GlucoseDiabetes MellitusDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Glycated HemoglobinBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringContinuous Glucose MonitoringHumansBlood GlucoseGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanContinuous glucose monitoringGlucose management indicatorHbA1cProportional biasUpdated glucose management indicator

Identifiers

PMID42029709
PMCPMC13310218

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.