Evidence mapPaperPMID 37153750Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in clinical diabetes and healthcare2023

The impact of structured self-monitoring of blood glucose on clinical, behavioral, and psychosocial outcomes among adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Elizabeth Holmes-Truscott, Shaira Baptista, Mathew Ling, Eileen Collins, EIif I Ekinci, John Furler, Virginia Hagger, Jo-Anne Manski-Nankervis, Caroline Wells, Jane Speight

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in clinical diabetes and healthcare, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Blood Glucose Monitoring Expert Group and Best Practice Recommendation-FITTER BiG.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Elizabeth Holmes-TruscottSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Shaira BaptistaSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Mathew LingSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Eileen CollinsDiabetes Victoria, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
EIif I EkinciDepartment of Medicine, Austin Health, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
John FurlerDepartment of General Practice, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Virginia HaggerThe Australian Centre for Behavioural Research in Diabetes, Diabetes Victoria, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Jo-Anne Manski-NankervisThe Australian Centre for Accelerating Diabetes Innovations (ACADI), The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Caroline WellsDiabetes Tasmania, Hobart, TAS, Australia.
Jane SpeightSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is considered of little clinical benefit for adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, but no comprehensive review of a structured approach to SMBG has been published to date. Purpose: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of sSMBG on HbA1c, treatment modifications, behavioral and psychosocial outcomes, and; examine the moderating effects of sSMBG protocol characteristics on HbA1c. Data sources: Four databases searched (November 2020; updated: February 2022). Study selection: Inclusion criteria: non-randomized and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective observational studies; reporting effect of sSMBG on stated outcomes; among adults (≥18 years) with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. Studies excluded if involving children or people with insulin-treated or other forms of diabetes. Data extraction and analysis: Outcome data extracted, and risk of bias/quality assessed independently by two researchers. Meta-analysis was conducted for RCTs, and moderators explored (HbA1c only). Data synthesis: From 2,078 abstracts, k=23 studies were included (N=5,372). Risk of bias was evident and study quality was low. Outcomes assessed included: HbA1c (k=23), treatment modification (k=16), psychosocial/behavioral outcomes (k=12). Meta-analysis revealed a significant mean difference favoring sSMBG in HbA1c (-0·29%, 95% CI: -0·46 to -0·11, k=13) and diabetes self-efficacy (0.17%, 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.33, k=2). Meta-analysis revealed no significant moderating effects by protocol characteristics. Limitations: Findings limited by heterogeneity in study designs, intervention characteristics, and psychosocial assessments. Conclusion: A small positive effect of sSMBG on HbA1c and diabetes self-efficacy was observed. Narrative synthesis of sSMBG intervention characteristics may guide future implementation. PROSPERO registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020208857, identifier CRD42020208857.

Indexed as

behavioral outcomesHbA1cmeta-analysispsychological outcomeself-monitor of blood glucose (SMBG)structured self-monitoring of blood glucosesystematic reviewtype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID37153750
PMCPMC10157033

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.