ArticleCurrent diabetes reports2026
Applications of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Cognitive Research in Diabetes: a Scoping Review.
Article in Current diabetes reports, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewContinuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has increasingly been incorporated into studies examining cognitive function in people with diabetes. This scoping review systematically maps how CGM has been applied in cognitive research among individuals with diabetes to characterize current methodological approaches, identify key knowledge gaps, and inform future research. RECENT
findingsA scoping review was conducted following Arksey and O'Malley's framework. A systematic search of five electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PsycINFO) was performed. Cognitive outcomes were extracted and mapped to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health framework. Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. CGM data completeness was consistently high, with 84-100% of expected CGM data captured, supporting the feasibility of intensive glucose monitoring in cognitive research in diabetes. Considerable heterogeneity was observed in cognitive domains and assessment tools. Most studies evaluated executive function, memory, and attention, whereas psychomotor, language, and perceived cognitive functions were less frequently assessed. More than 10 distinct instruments were used to assess memory and executive function. Across studies, similar cognitive domains were examined regardless of the specific CGM metrics employed. Research examining CGM and cognitive function in diabetes is characterized by substantial methodological variability in both CGM metrics and cognitive assessments. These findings underscore the need for greater standardization to improve cross-study comparability and to advance CGM-informed cognitive research, including the development of personalized interventions to support cognitive health through optimized glucose management in people with diabetes.
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.