Cited by 38Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Management and EducationMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Identifying the deficiencies of currently available CGM to improve uptake and benefit

Barnard‐Kelly, Katharine D., Martínez‐Brocca, Maria Asunción, Glatzer, Timor, Oliver, Nick·2024·Diabetic Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The use of diabetes technologies is increasing worldwide, with health systems facilitating improved access to devices. Continuous glucose monitoring is a complex intervention that provides information on glucose concentration, rate and direction of change, historical data and alerts and alarms for extremes of glucose. These data do not themselves change glycaemia and require translation to a meaningful action for impact. It is, therefore, crucial that such systems advance to better meet the needs of individuals using them. METHODS: Narrative review of the use of, engagement with, limitations and unmet needs of continuous glucose monitoring systems. RESULTS: CGM devices have made a significant contribution to the self-management of diabetes; however, challenges with access and user experience persist, with multiple limitations to uptake and benefit. These limitations include physical size and implementation, with associated stigma, alarm fatigue, sleep disturbance and the challenge of addressing large volumes of real-time data. Greater personalisation throughout the continuous glucose monitoring journey, with a focus on usability, may improve the benefits derived from the device and reduce the burden of self-management. Healthcare professionals may have unconscious biases that affect the provision of continuous glucose monitors due to deprivation, education, age, ethnicity and other characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous glucose monitoring exerts a dose-dependent response; the more it is used, the more effective it is. For optimal use, continuous glucose monitors must not just reduce the burden of management in one dimension but facilitate net improvement in all domains of self-management for all users.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/dme.15338

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barnard‐Kelly, K. D., Martínez‐Brocca, M. A., Glatzer, T., & Oliver, N.
Affiliations
  • Spotlight Consultations Ltd Portsmouth UK
  • Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena (ES)
  • Roche Diabetes Care GmbH (Germany) (DE)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
Venue
Diabetic Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2024-05-12
Volume
41
Issue
8
Pages
e15338-e15338
ISSN
  • 0742-3071 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5491
OpenAlex
W4396866330
Cited by
37
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 8
FWCI
2.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Diabetic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Roche Diabetes Care
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
continuous glucose monitoring, diabetes self-management, device usability, user experience, alarm fatigue, sleep disorders, stigma, unmet needs, personalization, diabetes technology
MeSH terms
Self-Management, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Humans, 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