ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2021
Analysis of a Unique Postmarket Surveillance Dataset That a Glucose Test-Strip Demonstrates no Evidence of Interference and Robust Clinical Accuracy Irrespective of the Prescription Medication Status of a Large Cohort of Patients With Diabetes.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Drug Interference in Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose and the Impact on Patient Safety: We Can Only Guard Against What We Are Looking for.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2024Review
- Traditional Interference Experiments vs. Method Comparison Interference Experiments.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2023Article
- Post-Market Surveillance Assessment of the Clinical Accuracy of a Blood Glucose Monitoring System with an Improved Algorithm for Enhanced Product Performance.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2023Article
- Post-Market Surveillance of a Blood Glucose Test Strip Demonstrates No Evidence of Interference on Clinical Accuracy in a Large Cohort of People with Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2023Article
- Diabetes Technology Meeting 2021.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite a marked increase in polypharmacy in patients with diabetes there have been no thorough evaluations of the impact of polypharmacy on the accuracy of any current blood glucose monitoring (BGM) system. This study evaluated the accuracy of a BGM test-strip with respect to polypharmacy using a large clinical registry dataset.
methodsMedication profiles were analyzed for 830 subjects (334 with type 1 [T1D] and 496 with type 2 diabetes [T2D]) attending three hospitals. Blood samples were analyzed to determine clinical accuracy of the BGM test-strip compared to a laboratory comparator.
resultsAcross the 830 subjects, 473 different medications (41 diabetes and 432 nondiabetes) were recorded. Patients took on average 6.5 (
conclusionsThis comprehensive analysis for this specific test-strip platform demonstrated no evidence of interference and robust clinical accuracy of this test strip, irrespective of the prescription medication status of patients with diabetes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.