Observational studyThe Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism2025
Feasibility, Acceptability, and Validity of Home Continuous Glucose Monitoring-Based Oral Glucose Tolerance Test in Youth.
Observational study in The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism, 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.
- Revolutionizing OGTT: Unlocking the Real-Time Insights and Expanded Data of Continuous Glucose Monitoring.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
contextHome-based approaches to type 2 diabetes (T2D) screening in youth may facilitate early diagnosis.
objectiveThis work aimed to evaluate feasibility, acceptability, and validity of a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)-based oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).
methodsA prospective observational study was conducted at a pediatric clinical and translational research center. Participants were youth aged 8 to 18 years with overweight/obesity and prediabetes-range glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), fasting glucose, or 2-hour glucose on OGTT, and/or one or more guideline-based T2D risk factors. Participants completed two 75 g 2-hour OGTT 1) at the research center using serum samples (research-OGTT), and 2) at home using blinded CGM (home-OGTT). Feasibility: Percentage with valid home-OGTT data (date/time reported, transmitter returned). Acceptability: Survey and interview responses. Validity: Sensitivity, specificity, positive- and negative predictive value (PPV, NPV) of home- vs research-OGTT dysglycemia (fasting ≥100 mg/dL; 2-hour ≥140 mg/dL).
resultsThirty-nine youth (54% female; 33% Black, 8% Hispanic/Latinx, 13% multiracial, 46% non-Hispanic White; age 14.6 ± 2.0 years; mean body mass index 37.0 ± 6.7 kg/m2) participated. HbA1c was 5.7% ± 0.4%, fasting glucose 85.7 ± 8.0 mg/dL, and 2-hour glucose 115.9 ± 25.9 mg/dL. Thirty (77%) had valid home-OGTT data. Acceptability was high (92% excellent/great, 8% neutral). Due to higher average values on home-OGTT, sensitivity and NPV were high (≥80%), while specificity (fasting: 10%; 2-hour: 25%) and PPV (fasting: 3.6%, 2-hour: 18.2%) were low.
conclusionHome-OGTT was acceptable, but strategies to precisely capture glucose ingestion timing could improve feasibility. Alternate dysglycemia thresholds may need to be defined prior to using CGM as a method for T2D screening in youth.
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.