Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40901276›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Beyond Mean Absolute Relative Difference (MARD): Rethinking Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) Evaluation for Real-World Diabetes Care.

Matteo Acanfora, Erika Pedone, Barbara Presciuttini, Francesca Ré, Luca Acanfora

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Matteo AcanforaInstitute of Endocrine and Metabolic Sciences, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, ITA.
Erika PedoneDiabetology Unit, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, ITA.
Barbara PresciuttiniEndocrinology Unit, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale (ASST) Mantova, Mantua, ITA.
Francesca RéDepartment of General Surgery, Villa Scassi Hospital, Genoa, ITA.
Luca AcanforaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Civil Hospital of Ovada, Ovada, ITA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has transformed diabetes mellitus management, evolving from a supportive monitoring tool to a central pillar of care. For people with type 1 diabetes and many insulin-treated individuals with type 2 diabetes, CGM now directly informs treatment decisions, especially when integrated with automated insulin delivery (AID) systems. In these hybrid closed-loop systems, sensor data drives real-time insulin adjustments, meaning that accuracy is not just a matter of measurement quality; it is a matter of patient safety. However, the primary accuracy measure currently used, the mean absolute relative difference (MARD), is increasingly inadequate for guiding clinical decisions. MARD offers a single averaged number under controlled conditions, but it does not capture the timing, direction, or clinical consequences of sensor errors. This is particularly problematic in AID systems, where even minor inaccuracies may lead to inappropriate insulin dosing, increasing the risk of hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia. Given the centrality of CGM in modern diabetes care, a more comprehensive evaluation approach is urgently needed, one that reflects real-world performance, prioritizes patient safety, and addresses the diverse contexts in which CGM devices are used. This editorial presents an opinion-based perspective, proposing a four-dimensional framework for CGM evaluation beyond the traditional reliance on MARD.

Indexed as

continuous glucose monitoring (cgm)endocrinology and diabetesmardmeasurement accuracysafety study

Identifiers

PMID40901276
PMCPMC12401530

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.