Cited by 49Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes Management and Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Glycemic variability modifies the relationship between time in range and hemoglobin A1c estimated from continuous glucose monitoring: A preliminary study

Lu, Jingyi, Ma, Xiaojing, Zhang, Lei, Mo, Yifei, Lu, Wei, Zhu, Wei, Bao, Yuqian, Jia, Weiping, Zhou, Jian·2020·Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice

Abstract

Aims Although there is a linear relationship between time in range (TIR) and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), a great variability of calculated TIR values for a given HbA1c, and vice versa, has been reported. Whether glycemic variability accounts for part of this variability remains to be investigated.Methods The data of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) from 2559 patients with type 2 diabetes was analyzed. Glycemic variability was assessed by glucose coefficient of variation (CV), and estimated HbA1C (eHbA1c) was calculated from mean sensor glucose.Results A strong correlation between TIR and eHbA1c (r = -0.908) was observed. The slopes of regression lines fitted to TIR values as a function of eHbA1c differed significantly for individuals with varying degrees of CV, especially when patients were stratified as stable (CV < 36%) or unstable (CV ≥ 36%) glucose levels. For patients in the high- or low-range of eHbA1c, there was a high variability of TIR values according to CV.Conclusions Glycemic variability significantly mediates the relationship between TIR and eHbA1c, and should be taken into consideration when setting an individualized target of TIR.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.diabres.2020.108032

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 14 · Cited by 49

Metadata

Authors
Lu, J., Ma, X., Zhang, L., Mo, Y., Lu, W., Zhu, W., Bao, Y., Jia, W., & Zhou, J.
Affiliations
Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN)
Corresponding author
Zhou, Jian
Venue
Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-03
Volume
161
Pages
108032
ISSN
0168-8227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3003797986
Cited by
49
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 3
FWCI
6.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Shanghai Municipal Education Commission
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
glycemic variability, time in range, continuous glucose monitoring, type 2 diabetes, individualized glycemic targets
MeSH terms
Preliminary Data, Aged, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Insulin, Insulin Infusion Systems, Male, Middle Aged, Reference Values, Time Factors, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review