Cited by 115Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes Management and Education

Self-monitoring of blood glucose in non-insulin treated patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Allemann, Sabin, Houriet, Carine, Diem, Peter, Stettler, Christoph·2009·Current Medical Research and Opinion

Abstract

Objective To assess the effect of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) on glycaemic control in non-insulin treated patients with type 2 diabetes by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis. Research design and methods MEDLINE and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched from inception to January 2009 for randomised controlled trials comparing SMBG with non-SMBG or more frequent SMBG with less intensive SMBG. Electronic searches were supplemented by manual searching of reference lists and reviews. The comparison of SMBG with non-SMBG was the primary, the comparison of more frequent SMBG with less intensive SMBG the secondary analysis. Stratified analyses were performed to evaluate modifying factors. Main outcome measures The primary endpoint was glycated haemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)), secondary outcomes included fasting glucose and the occurrence of hypoglycaemia. Using random effects models a weighted mean difference (WMD) was calculated for HbA(1c) and a risk ratio (RR) was calculated for hypoglycaemia. Due to considerable heterogeneity, no combined estimate was computed for fasting glucose. Results Fifteen trials (3270 patients) were included in the analyses. SMBG was associated with a larger reduction in HbA(1c) compared with non-SMBG (WMD -0.31%, 95% confidence interval -0.44 to -0.17). The beneficial effect associated with SMBG was not attenuated over longer follow-up. SMBG significantly increased the probability of detecting a hypoglycaemia (RR 2.10,…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1185/03007990903364665

Cites

62 of 62 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
Allemann, S., Houriet, C., Diem, P., & Stettler, C.
Affiliations
University of Bern (CH)
Corresponding author
Allemann, Sabin
Venue
Current Medical Research and Opinion
Published
2009-10-14
Volume
25
Issue
12
Pages
2903-2913
ISSN
  • 0300-7995 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-4877
OpenAlex
W1974111768
Cited by
115
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 17
FWCI
1.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Current Medical Research and Opinion (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bern Open Repository and Information System (University of Bern) (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of Texas at Austin
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
self-monitoring of blood glucose, type 2 diabetes, non-insulin-treated patients, glycemic control, HbA1c, hypoglycemia, fasting blood glucose
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Humans, Hypoglycemia, Hypoglycemic Agents, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring, Incidence

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