ArticleAustralian veterinary journal2026
Evaluation of a portable glucometer for blood glucose measurement in juvenile green sea turtles (Chelonia mydas).
Article in Australian veterinary journal, 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Blood glucose is a key physiological indicator in sea turtles, but its measurement in field settings can be challenging. Portable point-of-care (POC) glucometers offer practicality, yet their agreement with reference laboratory methods has not been established for juvenile green sea turtles (Chelonia mydas) from the Southwestern Atlantic. We compared glucose concentrations from a portable glucometer with a reference enzymatic method using blood samples from 30 free-ranging juvenile green turtles captured in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Agreement was assessed by Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman analysis. The influence of fibropapillomatosis and packed cell volume was also examined. The glucometer significantly underestimated glucose compared to the reference method (median 70 vs. 90 mg/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), with a mean bias of -17.9 mg/dL and wide limits of agreement. Passing-Bablok regression showed no significant systematic or proportional errors (95% CI for intercept included 0; 95% CI for slope included 1). Only 43% of glucometer readings fell within ±20% of the reference ranges reported for sea turtles. Packed cell volume correction slightly reduced the bias but did not improve agreement. Fibropapillomatosis status did not affect absolute glucose concentrations but influenced relative bias when packed cell volume was within the manufacturer's validated range. The portable glucometer is not interchangeable with the reference method for this species. While it may provide rapid field estimates, its results require cautious interpretation and, whenever possible, laboratory validation.
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.