Cited by 63Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Management and EducationDiabetes Treatment and Management

Improved Real-World Glycemic Control With Continuous Glucose Monitoring System Predictive Alerts

Open access
Abraham, Sinu Bessy, Arunachalam, Siddharth, Zhong, Alex, Agrawal, Pratik, Cohen, Ohad, McMahon, Chantal M.·2021·Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology

Abstract

Background: Most standalone real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) systems provide predictive low and high sensor glucose (SG) threshold alerts. The durations and risk of low and high SG excursions following Guardian™ Connect CGM system predictive threshold alerts were evaluated. Methods: Continuous glucose monitoring system data uploaded between January 2, 2017 and May 22, 2018 by 3133 individuals using multiple daily injections (MDIs) or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy were deidentified and retrospectively analyzed. Glucose excursions were defined as SG values that went beyond a preset low or high SG threshold for ≥15 minutes. For a control group, thresholds were based on the median of the low SG threshold limit (70 mg/dL) and the high SG threshold limit (210 mg/dL) preset by all system users. During periods when alerts were not enabled, timestamps were identified when a predictive alert would have been triggered. The time before low horizon was 17.5 minutes and the time before high horizon was 15 minutes, of all users who enabled alerts. Excursions occurring after a low SG or high SG predictive alert were segmented into prevented, ≤20, 20-60, and >60 minutes. Results: Excursions were prevented after 59% and 39% of low and high SG predictive alerts, respectively. The risk of a low or high excursion occurring was 1.9 ( P < 0.001, 95% CI, 1.88-1.93) and 3.3 ( P < 0.001, 95% CI, 3.20-3.30) times greater, respectively, when alerts were not enabled. Conclusions: The predictive alerts of the RT-CGM system under study can help individuals living with diabetes prevent some real-world low and high SG excursions. This can be especially important for those unable to reach or maintain glycemic control with basic RT-CGM or CSII therapy.

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 · 10.1177/1932296819859334

Cites

50 of 50 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?

  • The most recent CGM sensors adopt simple prediction algorithms, such as linear extrapolation, to predict future interstitial glucose concentrations 15-30 min in advance in real-time and generate predictive alerts when a hypo/hyperglycemic event is foreseen.

    “The most recent CGM sensors adopt very simple prediction algorithms, e.g., linear extrapolation, to predict future interstitial glucose concentrations (e.g., 15–30 min in advance) in real-time and generate predictive alerts when a hypo/hyperglycemic event is foreseen [49].”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Battelino T, Phillip M, Bratina N, Nimri R, Oskarsson P, Bolinder J. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on hypo- glycemia in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2011;34(4):795- 800.
  2. Rothman KJ, Greenland S. Modern Epidemiology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1998.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Abraham, S. B., Arunachalam, S., Zhong, A., Agrawal, P., Cohen, O., & McMahon, C. M.
Affiliations
  • Medtronic (United States) (US)
  • Medtronic (Switzerland) (CH)
Corresponding author
McMahon, Chantal M.
Venue
Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology
Published
2019-07-04
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
91-97
ISSN
1932-2968 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2954444460
Cited by
63
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1
FWCI
5.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Medtronic
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 › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
continuous glucose monitoring, hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, glycemic excursions, glycemic control, multiple daily insulin injections, insulin pump therapy, diabetes management
MeSH terms
Glycemic Control, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Glucose, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Insulin, Insulin Infusion Systems, Retrospective Studies, 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