Observational studyJournal of general internal medicine2025
Demographic, Clinical, Psychosocial, and Behavioral Predictors of Continuous Glucose Monitor Use in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes.
Observational study in Journal of general internal medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Characterizing Continuous Glucose Monitoring Prescription Patterns Between 2020 and 2024: A Retrospective Study at a Single Primary Care Facility in the United States.Journal of diabetes research · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundContinuous glucose monitor (CGM) use is increasing rapidly among people with type 2 diabetes, although little is known about predictors of CGM use beyond clinical and demographic information available in electronic medical records. Behavioral and psychosocial characteristics may also predict CGM use.
objectiveWe examined clinical, psychosocial, and behavioral characteristics that may predict CGM use in adults with type 2 diabetes.
designThis longitudinal observational study comprised a secondary analysis of data collected in a larger trial. Enrollment included HbA1c tests and surveys assessing demographic, clinical, psychosocial, and behavioral characteristics. We queried participants regarding their CGM use during the study on their final self-report surveys, 15 months post-enrollment.
participantsParticipants were 245 community-dwelling adults with type 2 diabetes recruited from primary care. APPROACH: We used logistic regression to predict CGM use during the 15-month trial period from baseline characteristics. KEY
resultsAround one-third of participants (37.1%; 91/245) started CGM. Predictors of starting CGM in bivariate models included younger age, higher socioeconomic status, insulin use, higher HbA1c, and more diabetes distress. When including all potential predictors in a single multivariable model, only younger age (aOR = 0.95, p = 0.001), insulin use (aOR = 2.33, p = 0.006), and higher socioeconomic status (aOR = 0.44, p = 0.037) were significant predictors. Despite the association between higher HbA1c and CGM use, neither diabetes self-care behaviors nor diabetes self-efficacy significantly predicted CGM use. Of participants who tried a CGM, 14.3% (13/91) had stopped, with cost being the most-cited reason.
conclusionsEven when including behavioral and psychological characteristics, younger age, using insulin, and higher socioeconomic status remain key predictors of CGM use. These findings emphasize the importance of access and affordability for people who may benefit from CGM. Providers should not bias their introduction of CGM towards those with (perceived or actual) optimal or sub-optimal self-care behaviors.
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.