Evidence mapPaperPMID 32209645Full record

Trial reportDiabetes care2020

Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Pregnancy: Importance of Analyzing Temporal Profiles to Understand Clinical Outcomes.

Eleanor M Scott, Denice S Feig, Helen R Murphy, Graham R Law, CONCEPTT Collaborative Group

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Diabetes care, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 78 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 at 9 institutions in 3 countries.

Eleanor M ScottDepartment of Clinical and Population Science, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, U.K. e.m.scott@leeds.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-5395-8261
Denice S FeigDepartment of Medicine, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Helen R MurphyDivision of Maternal Health, St Thomas' Hospital, King's College London, London, U.K.ORCID 0000-0001-6876-8727
Graham R Law
CONCEPTT Collaborative Group
St Thomas' Hospital · GBSinai Health System · CAUniversity of Leeds · GBSt Joseph's Health Centre · CACentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal · CALeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust · GBLincoln University - Pennsylvania · USOttawa Hospital · CASunnybrook Health Science Centre · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine if temporal glucose profiles differed between RESEARCH DESIGN AND

methodsStandard summary metrics and functional data analysis (FDA) were applied to CGM data from the CONCEPTT trial (RT-CGM,

resultsFDA revealed that women using RT-CGM had significantly lower glucose (0.4-0.8 mmol/L [7-14 mg/dL]) for 7 h/day (0800 h to 1200 h and 1600 h to 1900 h) compared with those with SMBG. Women using pumps had significantly higher glucose (0.4-0.9 mmol/L [7-16 mg/dL]) for 12 h/day (0300 h to 0600 h, 1300 h to 1800 h, and 2030 h to 0030 h) at 24 weeks with no difference at 34 weeks compared with MDI. Women who had an LGA infant ran a significantly higher glucose by 0.4-0.7 mmol/L (7-13 mg/dL) for 4.5 h/day at baseline, by 0.4-0.9 mmol/L (7-16 mg/dL) for 16 h/day at 24 weeks, and by 0.4-0.7 mmol/L (7-13 mg/dL) for 14 h/day at 34 weeks.

conclusionsFDA of temporal glucose profiles gives important information about differences in glucose control and its timing, which are undetectable by standard summary metrics. Women using RT-CGM were able to achieve better daytime glucose control, reducing fetal exposure to maternal glucose.

Indexed as

Glycemic ControlAdolescentAdultBlood GlucoseBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringComputer SystemsDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Equipment and SuppliesFemaleFetal MacrosomiaGestational AgeGlycated HemoglobinHumansInfant, NewbornInsulinInsulin Infusion SystemsBlood GlucoseGlycated HemoglobinInsulin

Identifiers

PMID32209645
PMCPMC7245356
OpenAlexW3014011074

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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 Socratic graph.