ArticleCardiovascular diabetology2022
Role of continuous glucose monitoring in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk: an expert-based multidisciplinary Delphi consensus.
Article in Cardiovascular diabetology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of continuous glucose monitoring in non-intensively managed type 2 diabetes: a Saudi Arabian consensus.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Guideline
- Trial
- State-of-the-art wearable sensors for cardiovascular health: a review.NPJ cardiovascular health · 2025Review
- Expanding the Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Impact on Glycemic Control and Metabolic Health.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems Can Meet the Challenge of Glucose Management and Beyond in Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes: An Expert Multidisciplinary Position.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2025Review
- Hypoglycemia and glycemic variability in acute myocardial infarction: the lesser-known aspects of glycemic control.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2025Review
- Recent drug development of dorzagliatin, a new glucokinase activator, with the potential to treat Type 2 diabetes: A review study.Journal of diabetes · 2024Review
- Article
- Progress in Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Feature Tracking for Evaluating Myocardial Strain in Type-2 Diabetes Mellitus.Current diabetes reviews · 2024Review
- Glucose variability: a new risk factor for cardiovascular disease.Acta diabetologica · 2023Review
- Development of a core outcome set for cardiovascular diabetology: a methodological framework.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundContinuous glucose monitoring (CGM) shows in more detail the glycaemic pattern of diabetic subjects and provides several new parameters ("glucometrics") to assess patients' glycaemia and consensually guide treatment. A better control of glucose levels might result in improvement of clinical outcome and reduce disease complications. This study aimed to gather an expert consensus on the clinical and prognostic use of CGM in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk or with heart disease.
methodsA list of 22 statements concerning type of patients who can benefit from CGM, prognostic impact of CGM in diabetic patients with heart disease, CGM use during acute cardiovascular events and educational issues of CGM were developed. Using a two-round Delphi methodology, the survey was distributed online to 42 Italian experts (21 diabetologists and 21 cardiologists) who rated their level of agreement with each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was predefined as more than 66% of the panel agreeing/disagreeing with any given statement.
resultsForty experts (95%) answered the survey. Every statement achieved a positive consensus. In particular, the panel expressed the feeling that CGM can be prognostically relevant for every diabetic patient (70%) and that is clinically useful also in the management of those with type 2 diabetes not treated with insulin (87.5%). The assessment of time in range (TIR), glycaemic variability (GV) and hypoglycaemic/hyperglycaemic episodes were considered relevant in the management of diabetic patients with heart disease (92.5% for TIR, 95% for GV, 97.5% for time spent in hypoglycaemia) and can improve the prognosis of those with ischaemic heart disease (100% for hypoglycaemia, 90% for hyperglycaemia) or with heart failure (87.5% for hypoglycaemia, 85% for TIR, 87.5% for GV). The experts retained that CGM can be used and can impact the short- and long-term prognosis during an acute cardiovascular event. Lastly, CGM has a recognized educational role for diabetic subjects.
conclusionsAccording to this Delphi consensus, the clinical and prognostic use of CGM in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk is promising and deserves dedicated studies to confirm the experts' feelings.
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.