ArticleBMJ open2025
Who is using continuous glucose monitoring for type 2 diabetes management? A scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEquitable access to healthcare technology is a major public health issue. For adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D), continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology can improve diabetes self-management and clinical outcomes. Even though CGM is now recommended by professional guidelines for all patients with diabetes on insulin therapy, evidence suggests that CGM is underutilised and inequitably prescribed across health systems. As CGM is an emergent technology, it is vital to understand what approaches have been studied to overcome inequities in CGM access for adults with T2D, what aspects of equitable access have yet to be addressed and what are facilitators and barriers to CGM access at the individual, facility and health system levels. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use the Joanna Briggs Institute's revised scoping review framework to conduct our analysis. The protocol is registered with Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/z2exn). We will search for peer-reviewed literature containing empirical evidence for the facilitators and barriers to equitable access to CGM technology for patients with T2D. Findings will be organised according to research objectives and the Framework for Digital Health Equity, and summarised using narrative synthesis of descriptive statistics for quantitative findings, and themes for qualitative findings. This review will be conducted and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The findings from this review will provide valuable information and support for future research into the equitable implementation and use of CGM for patients with T2D. We will disseminate findings at conferences and publish in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: https://osf.io/z2exn.
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.