ArticlePLoS biology2021
Towards precision medicine in diabetes? A critical review of glucotypes.
Article in PLoS biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-Invasive Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Patients Without Diabetes: Use in Cardiovascular Prevention-A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- Improved detection of decreased glucose handling capacities via continuous glucose monitoring-derived indices.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- Use of Continuous Glucose Monitors by People Without Diabetes: An Idea Whose Time Has Come?Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2023Article
- Chemical Compounds and Ambient Factors Affecting Pancreatic Alpha-Cells Mass and Function: What Evidence?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- TyGIS: improved triglyceride-glucose index for the assessment of insulin sensitivity during pregnancy.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In response to a study previously published in PLOS Biology, this Formal Comment thoroughly examines the concept of 'glucotypes' with regard to its generalisability, interpretability and relationship to more traditional measures used to describe data from continuous glucose monitoring.
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.