ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2026
Performance and Safety of a 15-Day Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring System in Chinese Adults With Diabetes: A Multicenter Trial.
Article 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. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study evaluated the performance and safety of a 15-day real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) system in Chinese adults with diabetes, focusing on its accuracy and clinical utility for long-term glucose management.
methodsA clinical evaluation was conducted using four rtCGM sensors per participant, with placement sites on both the upper arm and the abdomen. The system's accuracy was assessed using a factory-calibrated model. Primary outcomes included the mean absolute relative difference (MARD), the 20/20% agreement rate, and the proportions of Clarke and Consensus Error Grid in zones A+B.
resultsA total of 74 participants were screened. The MARD values were 8.44% for the upper arm and 8.91% for the abdomen under factory-calibrated model. The 20/20% agreement rates were 95.78% for the upper arm and 94.41% for the abdomen under factory-calibrated model. The Clarke and Consensus Error Grid A+B proportions were 99.53% and 99.96% for the upper arm, and 99.46% and 99.82% for the abdomen under factory-calibrated model, respectively.
conclusionThe CGM system showed high accuracy, robust alert performance, stable repeatability, and favorable safety over 15 days in Chinese adults with diabetes, supporting its clinical utility for glucose monitoring in these adult patients.
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.