ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Health Technology Assessment of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems for Paediatric Patients.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesType1 diabetes (T1D) is one of the most common chronic diseases in pediatric age. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to improve glycaemic control in adults compared to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG); however, evidence about its use in the pediatric field is limited and fragmented and needs to be improved. This paper aims to address all the critical aspects linked to the use of CGM in a pediatric population while also describing a methodology for conducting health technology assessment (HTA) to support the decision-making process.
methodsThe use of CGM and SMBG in a pediatric population was compared by using a decision-making support tool (DoHTA method). Twenty-seven Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) were identified, defining safety, clinical effectiveness, organizational, patient perspective, and economic aspects. Performance scores for both monitoring systems were assessed based on these KPIs, leading to a final comparative ranking.
resultsCGM demonstrated a 29.3% performance advantage over SMBG, highlighting its benefits in terms of clinical effectiveness, patient perspectives, safety, and economic evaluation. No substantial differences were identified in terms of organizational aspects.
conclusionsThis study critically evaluates the benefits and drawbacks of the use of CGM in a pediatric population. It integrates the assessment of the clinical effectiveness with the organizational aspects, the cost, the patient perspective, and the safety, providing a valuable proof of evidence as well as a reliable and transferable method for conducting decision-making processes in a hospital setting.
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.