ArticleDiabetologia2024
Cost-utility analysis of Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring versus FreeStyle Libre 1 intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes in Belgium.
Article in Diabetologia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03772600 (Comparing Continuous With Flash Glucose Monitoring in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes), which is not on this 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.
Comparing Continuous With Flash Glucose Monitoring in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Economic analyses of freestyle libre systems for people living with diabetes: a systematic literature review.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2025Review
- Criteria for Personalised Choice of a Continuous Glucose Monitoring System: An Expert Opinion.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aims/hypothesisThe aim of this study was to assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) with alert functionality compared with FreeStyle Libre 1 intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) without alerts in adults with type 1 diabetes in Belgium.
methodsThe IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model was used to estimate cost-effectiveness. Input data for the simulated baseline cohort were sourced from the randomised ALERTT1 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov. REGISTRATION NO: NCT03772600). The age of the participants was 42.9 ± 14.1 years (mean ± SD), and the baseline HbA
resultsIn the base case, rtCGM dominated isCGM, resulting in lower diabetes-related complication costs and better health outcomes. The associated main drivers favouring rtCGM were lower HbA CONCLUSIONS/
interpretationWhen priced similarly, Dexcom G6 rtCGM with alert functionality has both economic and clinical benefits compared with FreeStyle Libre 1 isCGM without alerts in adults with type 1 diabetes in Belgium, and appears to be a cost-effective glucose monitoring modality. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03772600.
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.