The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Performance Evaluation of the MiniMed® Continuous Glucose Monitoring System During Patient Home Use
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The recent availability of a continuous glucose monitor offers the opportunity to match the demands of intensive diabetes management with a period of equally intensive blood glucose monitoring. The present study evaluates the performance of the MiniMed continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) in patients with diabetes during home use. METHODS: Performance data and demographic information were obtained from 135 patients who were (mean +/- SD) 40.5+/-14.5 years old, had an average duration of diabetes of 18.0+/-9.8 years, 50% were female, 90% were Caucasian, and 87% of whom had been diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. Patients were selected by their physician, trained on the use of the CGMS and wore the device at home for 3 days or more. The performance of the CGMS was evaluated against blood glucose measurements obtained using each patient's home blood glucose meter. Evaluation statistics included correlation, linear regression, mean difference and percent absolute difference scores, and Clarke error grid analysis. RESULTS: The CGMS values were compared to 2477 SMBG tests (r = 0.91, slope = 0.93, intercept = 14.5 mg/dL, mean absolute difference = 18.0%+/-19.8%). Clarke error grid analysis showed 96.2% of the data pairs falling within the clinically acceptable regions (zones A and B). CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the agreement of the CGMS to blood glucose meter values, under conditions of home use, in patients selected by their physicians as candidates for continuous monitoring. The detailed glucose information provided by the CGMS should make successful management of diabetes more easily achieved.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
Bode, B. W., Gross, T. M., Thornton, K. R., & Mastrototaro, J. J. (1999) · Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice · doi:10.1016/s0168-8227(99)00113-8 · Cited by 232
Self-citation
Cited by
Glucose Biosensors: An Overview of Use in Clinical Practice
Yoo, E.-H., & Lee, S.-Y. (2010) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s100504558 · Cited by 1,137
Device integration of electrochemical biosensors
Wu, J., Liu, H., Chen, W., Ma, B., & Ju, H. (2023) · Nature Reviews Bioengineering · doi:10.1038/s44222-023-00032-w · Cited by 895
Enzyme‐Based Glucose Sensor: From Invasive to Wearable Device
Lee, H., Hong, Y. J., Baik, S., Hyeon, T., & Kim, D. (2018) · Advanced Healthcare Materials · doi:10.1002/adhm.201701150 · Cited by 778
In Silico Preclinical Trials: A Proof of Concept in Closed-Loop Control of Type 1 Diabetes
Kovatchev, B. P., Breton, M., Dalla Man, C., & Cobelli, C. (2009) · Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology · doi:10.1177/193229680900300106 · Cited by 760
Tattoo-Based Noninvasive Glucose Monitoring: A Proof-of-Concept Study
Bandodkar, A. J., Jia, W., Yardımcı, C., Wang, X., Ramirez, J., & Wang, J. (2015) · Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1021/ac504300n · Cited by 700
Metadata
- Authors
- Gross, T. M., Bode, B. W., Einhorn, D., Kayne, D. M., Reed, J. H., White, N. H., & Mastrototaro, J. J.
- Venue
- Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2000-05
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 49-56
- ISSN
- 1520-9156 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-8593
- OpenAlex
- W2004749714
- Cited by
- 303
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 10.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Performance Evaluation of the MiniMed® Continuous Glucose Monitoring System During Patient Home Use. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1089/152091500316737
- The paper
- Gross, T. M., Bode, B. W., Einhorn, D., Kayne, D. M., Reed, J. H., White, N. H., & Mastrototaro, J. J. (2000). Performance Evaluation of the MiniMed® Continuous Glucose Monitoring System During Patient Home Use. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics. https://doi.org/10.1089/152091500316737
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.