Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39158986›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2024

Performance of a Novel Continuous Glucose Monitoring Device in People With Diabetes.

Julia K Mader, Delia Waldenmaier, Wiebke Mueller-Hoffmann, Katrin Mueller, Michael Angstmann, Gerhard Vogt, Cosima C Rieger, Manuel Eichenlaub, Thomas Forst, Guido Freckmann

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2024. 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. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Performance of a New Continuous Glucose Monitoring System in German Adults Living with Diabetes.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. The Promise of Hypoglycemia Risk Prediction.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Predicting Glucose Values: A New Era for Continuous Glucose Monitoring.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2024
    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.

Julia K MaderDivision of Endocrinology and Diabetology, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-7854-4233
Delia WaldenmaierInstitut für Diabetes-Technologie Forschungs- und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH an der Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3280-2369
Wiebke Mueller-HoffmannRoche Diabetes Care GmbH, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5795-046X
Katrin MuellerRoche Diabetes Care GmbH, Mannheim, Germany.
Michael AngstmannRoche Diabetes Care GmbH, Mannheim, Germany.
Gerhard VogtRoche Diabetes Care GmbH, Mannheim, Germany.
Cosima C RiegerRoche Diabetes Care GmbH, Mannheim, Germany.
Manuel EichenlaubInstitut für Diabetes-Technologie Forschungs- und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH an der Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2150-3160
Thomas ForstCRS Clinical Research Services Mannheim GmbH, Mannheim, Germany.
Guido FreckmannInstitut für Diabetes-Technologie Forschungs- und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH an der Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0406-9529

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn this multicenter study, performance of a novel continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) system was evaluated.

methodsAdult participants with diabetes were included in the study. They each wore three sensors of the CGM system on the upper arms for up to 14 days. During four in-clinic visits, frequent comparison measurements with capillary blood glucose (BG) samples were performed. The primary endpoint was the 20/20 agreement rate (AR): the percentage of CGM readings within ±20 mg/dL (at BG values <100 mg/dL) or ±20% (at BG values ≥100 mg/dL) of the comparator. Further evaluations included mean absolute relative difference (MARD) and 20/20 AR in different BG ranges and across the wear time.

resultsData from 48 participants and 139 sensors were analyzed. During in-clinic sessions the 20/20 AR was 90.5% and the MARD was 9.2%. For BG ranges <70, 70-180, and >180 mg/dL, 20/20 AR was 94.3%, 89.0%, and 92.5%, respectively. At the beginning, middle, and end of sensor wear time, 20/20 AR was 92.8%, 91.5%, and 85.9%, respectively. The 14-day survival probability was 82.4%. Pain and bleeding after sensor insertion were within the expected range. Based on the study outcome, the use of the device is regarded as safe.

conclusionsThe system showed a good performance compared to capillary BG measurements. This level of accuracy could be shown over the entire measurement range, especially in the low glycemic range, and the whole wear time of the sensors. The results of this study are supporting a non-adjunctive use of the device.

Indexed as

Blood GlucoseBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringAdultAgedContinuous Glucose MonitoringDiabetes MellitusFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsBlood Glucoseaccuracycontinuous glucose monitoringMARDperformance

Identifiers

PMID39158986
PMCPMC11418503

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.