ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2022
Variation of Mean Absolute Relative Differences of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems Throughout the Day.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- A fully integrated smart ring for daily biochemical monitoring.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Nanostructured electrode materials and flexible-substrate engineering for wearable multi-analyte biosensors in diabetes monitoring and personalized care: a comprehensive review.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2026Review
- Optimizing Continuous Glucose Monitoring Adoption in India: From Current Challenges to Future Solutions.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2026Review
- How data drift impacts the safety and interpretability of machine learning models predicting risk from blood glucose control.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Article
- Personalized blood glucose prediction in type 1 diabetes using meta-learning with bidirectional long short term memory-transformer hybrid model.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Continuous Glucose Deviation Interval and Variability Analysis (CG-DIVA): A Novel Approach for the Statistical Accuracy Assessment of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2024Article
- Head-to-Head Evaluation of Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Automated Insulin Delivery Systems: Why are They not Used More Systematically?Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2024Article
- Perceptions of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems in the T1D Exchange Diabetes Registry: Satisfaction, Concerns, and Areas for Future Improvement.Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2024Article
- Clinical Performance Evaluation of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems: A Scoping Review and Recommendations for Reporting.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
- Data Obtained with Early Generations of CGM Sensors: Comment on Pleus et al.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2022Article
- The Devil Is in the Details: Use, Limitations, and Implementation of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in the Inpatient Setting.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2022Article
- Benefits of a Switch from Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring (isCGM) to Real-Time (rt) CGM in Diabetes Type 1 Suboptimal Controlled Patients in Real-Life: A One-Year Prospective StudySensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is an increasing use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) by people with diabetes. Measurement performance is often characterized by the mean absolute relative difference (MARD). However, MARD is influenced by a number of factors and little is known about whether MARD is stable throughout the day. MATERIAL AND
methodsA total of 24 participants with type 1 diabetes were enrolled in the study. The study was performed for seven in-patient days. Participants wore two CGM systems in parallel and performed additional frequent blood glucose (BG) measurements. On two days, glucose excursions were induced.MARD was calculated between pairs of CGM and BG values, with BG values serving as reference values. ARD values calculated from CGM-BG pairs were grouped by hour of the day. Results were analyzed separately for glucose excursion days and for regular days.
resultsTotal MARDs for the complete study duration were 12.5% ± 3.6% and 13.2% ± 2.4% (
conclusionsAnalytical performance of the two CGM systems, assessed by MARD, was found to vary markedly throughout the day. Activities of daily life likely triggered these variations. An increasing number of CGM users base therapeutic decisions on CGM values, and they should be aware of these variations of performance throughout the day.
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.