Cited by 11Diabetes Management and ResearchPhysical Activity and HealthDiabetes Treatment and Management

Using continuous glucose monitoring to prescribe an exercise time: a randomised controlled trial in adults with type 2 diabetes

Open access
Chang, Courtney R., Roach, Lauren A., Russell, Brooke M., Francois, Monique E.·2025·Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice

Abstract

PURPOSE: Growing evidence suggests the exercise timing, time-of-day it is performed, is important for maximizing glycemic benefits in type 2 diabetes (T2D). This randomized controlled trial investigated the impact of utilizing continuous glucose monitoring to personalise exercise timing on peak hyperglycaemia and cardiometabolic health in people with T2D. METHODS: ) were randomized to eight weeks: i) waitlist control (CTL, eight week CTL then re-randomized to interventions), ii) 22-min daily exercise beginning ∼ 30 min before peak hyperglycemia (ExPeak) or iii) 22-min daily exercise ∼ 90 min after peak hyperglycemia (NonPeak). Time of peak hyperglycemia was pre-determined for each participant using the median of a 14-d habitual continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) period. Glycemic control (HbA1c [primary outcome], CGM), vascular function (flow-mediated dilation [FMD]), arterial stiffness, blood pressure) and body composition were assessed. Linear mixed models compared changes across time between groups. RESULTS: There was no intervention effect for HbA1c, however there was a significant interaction for changes in 24-h peak glucose and %FMD between groups. Compared to CTL, both intervention groups significantly lowered peak glucose (ExPeak: 95 %CI: -2.0 to -0.3 mmol/L, NonPeak: CI: -2.3 to -0.6 mmol/L) and %FMD increased (ExPeak: 95 %CI: 0.6 to 1.5 %, NonPeak: 95 %CI: 0.0 to 1.1 %). Adherence to interventions was high for both intervention groups (>90 %). CONCLUSION: Prescribing exercise to target peak hyperglycemia did not improve HbA1c; however cardiometabolic health outcomes improved in both groups prescribed an exercise time compared to control. Personalizing exercise prescription by prescribing a time to exercise may be a novel approach to improve health outcomes and physical activity participation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.diabres.2025.112072

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Over time, repeated goal attainment and visible progress may strengthen patients' sense of mastery and self-efficacy, thereby facilitating a shift from externally prompted behavior to proactive self-management.

    “Over time, repeated goal attainment and visible progress may strengthen patients' sense of mastery and self-efficacy, thereby facilitating a shift from externally prompted behavior to proactive self-management (14, 17, 20, 25, 26).”

    From Behavior change pathways by which digital wearable devices support exercise self-management in type 2 diabetes: a scoping review with machine learning–assisted text mining (2026) · cites this paper as [26]

    The Discussion (section 4; page not provided) says visual feedback from an unblinded glucose monitor may improve self-efficacy, motivation, and adherence over time. It does not describe repeated goal attainment, a growing sense of mastery, or a shift from externally prompted behavior to proactive self-management; it says whether this approach empowers patients to improve self-management needs further study. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chang, C. R., Roach, L. A., Russell, B. M., & Francois, M. E.
Affiliations
University of Wollongong (AU)
Venue
Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-04
Volume
222
Pages
112072
ISSN
0168-8227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4408012441
Cited by
11
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 1
FWCI
7.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • NSW Health
  • University of Wollongong
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1177234)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, exercise timing, continuous glucose monitoring, individualized exercise prescription, glycemic control, HbA1c, flow-mediated dilation, vascular function, arterial stiffness, blood pressure, cardiometabolic health, body composition
MeSH terms
Glycemic Control, Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Aged, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Hyperglycemia, Male, Middle Aged, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring, Exercise

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