ArticleActa diabetologica2023
Using flash glucose monitoring in pregnancies in routine care of patients with gestational diabetes mellitus: a pilot study.
Article in Acta diabetologica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Role of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Managing Hyperglycaemia First Detected in Pregnancy: A Narrative Review.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Review
- Conflicting evidence for continuous glucose monitoring in gestational diabetes: current challenges and the imperative for individual participant data meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2026Review
- Managing Gestational Diabetes Complexity with Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Quality of Life in Women With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Treatment Satisfaction Upon Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Observational
- The Efficacy and Acceptability of Flash Glucose Monitoring in Pregnant Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimFlash glucose monitoring (FGM) has been approved for the care of pregnant women with preexisting diabetes since 2017. However, its use in gestational diabetes (GDM) has been critically discussed. Inaccuracy and missing recommendations for target values are the main arguments against the use of FGM in GDM. To date, there is a lack of data to justify routine use of FGM in GDM pregnancies. Consequently, this new technology has been withheld from GDM-patients. Aim of our pilot study was to analyze the impact of FGM use on pregnancy outcomes, patient's satisfaction and to confirm the safe use in GDM pregnancies.
methodsCohort study of 37 FGM-managed GDM pregnancies compared with 74 matched women using self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). Group comparison using nonparametric testing concerning patients characteristic and perinatal outcome focusing on adverse outcomes (preeclampsia, preterm delivery, large for gestational age, C-sections, neonatal intensive care unit admission, hyperbilirubinemia and hypoglycemia). Evaluation of patient's treatment satisfaction using the "Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire change" (DTSQc) and patient interviews.
resultsNo significant differences in patient's characteristics despite gestational age at diagnosis (FGM with 20 vs. SMBG with 25 weeks). No difference in gestational weight gain, HbA1c progression and perinatal outcome. Treatment satisfaction obtained by the DTSQc revealed a high level of satisfaction with FGM use.
conclusionFGM use was well accepted and did not affect perinatal outcome. Use of FGM during pregnancy is safe and non-inferior to the management with SBGM. FGM should be considered as an option in the management of GDM patients.
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.