ArticleDiabetes, obesity & metabolism2026
Cost-effectiveness analysis of Dexcom ONE+ real-time continuous glucose monitoring versus self-monitoring of blood glucose in people with type 2 diabetes in Aotearoa New Zealand.
Article in Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2026. 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
Abstract
aimsReal-time continuous glucose monitors (rt-CGM) have been found effective and economical for the treatment of diabetes in many countries. The objective of this study was to provide a cost-effectiveness analysis of rt-CGM versus self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) from the perspective of a healthcare payer in New Zealand. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe cost-effectiveness of rt-CGM in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who require intensive insulin therapy was analysed using the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model (CDM), providing outputs including life expectancy, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), direct costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and incidence rates of complications. A lifetime (50 years) time horizon was used with an annual discount rate of 3.5%.
resultsIn the base case, rt-CGM was associated with a gain of 0.488 QALYs and incremental costs of NZD 5633 compared with SMBG, resulting in an ICER of NZD 11 533 per QALY. This corresponded to a gain of 87 QALYs per NZD 1 million invested. Scenario analyses suggested that CGM is potentially cost saving at earlier ages of rt-CGM initiation and among high-risk populations, such as Māori and Pacific Peoples, yielding higher gains in QALYs at lower total direct costs. Reductions were predicted in the risks of ophthalmic, renal, peripheral, and cardiovascular complications.
conclusionsThis analysis provides insight into the cost-effectiveness of rt-CGM versus SMBG from the perspective of payers in New Zealand, demonstrating reductions in the risks of complications in addition to reductions in their associated costs.
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.