ArticleEndocrinology, diabetes & metabolism2022
Validity of Danish public criteria for providing flash glucose monitoring to participants with type 1 diabetes-An explorative cohort study.
Article in Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validity of Danish public criteria for providing flash glucose monitoring to participants with type 1 diabetes-An explorative cohort study.Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFlash glucose monitor (FGM) use is increasing. A set of Danish criteria for regulating the use has been released. We assessed their validity.
methodsPatients with type 1 diabetes attending our clinic were offered Freestyle Libre Sensor for 12 months and stratified into fulfilling the Danish regional criteria (RC+) or not (RC-). Primary endpoint was achieving individualized target HbA1c. Secondary endpoints were HbA1c reduction ≥5%, time in range (TIR), time below range (TBR), daily scans, change in median HbA1c, and noted experiences.
resultsTwo hundred seventy-eight participants were included. Forty-four participants met target HbA1c after 1 year. No difference between RC+ and RC- was observed (p = .136). Higher age was associated with probability to meet target HbA1c (RR = 3.15, [95% CI: 1.15, 8.62]) as was frequent scans (RR = 1.88, [95% CI: 0.99, 3.57]). One hundred twenty-three participants met an HbA1c reduction ≥5%, the majority represented in RC+ (p = .023). Higher baseline HbA1c was associated with a reduction of HbA1c ≥5% after 1 year (RR = 1.97, [95% CI: 1.40, 2.78]). There was no difference between RC+ and RC- in TIR, TBR, and daily scans. Positive experiences dominated from both participants and healthcare professionals. More positive experiences were noted from healthcare professionals in RC- (p = .003) but no difference in reported experiences among participants in RC+ and RC- (p = .880).
conclusionThe Danish Regional Criteria seems not a valid tool for regulation of FGM. Participants of older age and participants with more frequent daily scans might benefit more from FGM.
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.