ArticleEndocrinology, diabetes & metabolism2022
Variation of glucose time in range in type 1 diabetes.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sampling duration matters: Intraindividual variation of glycaemic metrics in type 1 diabetes using automated insulin delivery.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026Article
- Variation of glucose time in range in type 1 diabetes.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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of the study was to assess the variation of glucose time in range (TIR) for persons with type 1 diabetes who perform intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM).
methodsGlucose data for 8 weeks were analysed for 166 persons. TIR was calculated over four consecutive 2 weeks periods. Sixty-one of the persons had two downloads with an interval of >3 months.
resultsA total of 140 individuals (84%) used multiple daily injection, and 26 (16%) used continuous insulin infusion. The within-individual standard deviation (SD) for TIR was 6.3% corresponding to 95% limits of agreement for the difference between two TIR values of ±17.6%. Mean TIR calculated from the first and last 2 weeks was 52.2 ± 17.1% and 53.7 ± 16.4%, respectively (difference 1.5%, SD of the difference 10.4%, p = .07). For persons with two downloads separated by months, the SD of the difference in TIR was 12.6%.
conclusionsThe 95% limit of agreement for TIR is vast for persons using isCGM. It is difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding systematic differences when individual TIR from 2 weeks are compared. This may not be valid for users of insulin pumps with closed-loop insulin delivery.
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.