ArticleAdvances in therapy2026
Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in the Treatment of Patients with Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes in Australia.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2026. 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.
- Cost-Effectiveness of Control-IQ+ Technology in Insulin-Treated Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in the United States.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionType 2 diabetes (T2D) is a major public health concern in Australia, associated with substantial clinical, humanistic, and economic burden. The condition is linked to high rates of cardiovascular and microvascular complications, premature mortality, and reduced quality of life. Effective glycemic management is central to reducing these adverse outcomes. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) has been shown to improve glycemic control in insulin-treated T2D compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). However, evidence of its cost-effectiveness in the Australian setting is limited. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Dexcom ONE+ RT-CGM versus SMBG in adults with insulin-treated T2D in Australia.
methodsA lifetime economic evaluation was conducted using version 10 of the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model. The analysis simulated clinical and economic outcomes for two subgroups: those on intensive insulin therapy (IIT) and non-intensive insulin therapy (NIIT). Treatment effects were sourced from clinical trials and real-world evidence. Outcomes included life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and direct healthcare costs. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated as cost per QALY gained. Scenario and sensitivity analyses tested robustness.
resultsRT-CGM was dominant compared to SMBG in both IIT and NIIT subgroups. In IIT, RT-CGM yielded 0.567 additional QALYs and cost savings of AUD 9869. In NIIT, it yielded 0.319 additional QALYs and savings of AUD 5253. Results were robust across sensitivity analyses. Health equity considerations were also identified, particularly for Indigenous populations and those with youth-onset T2D.
conclusionsRT-CGM was dominant in both insulin-treated subgroups, improving patient outcomes while reducing healthcare costs. These findings highlight the potential value of RT-CGM for broad reimbursement in Australia and the importance of addressing inequities in glycemic management, particularly among Indigenous Australians and younger individuals with T2D.
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.