Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 228

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Accuracy of the 5-Day FreeStyle Navigator Continuous Glucose Monitoring System

Weinstein, Richard L., Schwartz, Sherwyn L., Brazg, Ronald L., Bugler, Jolyon R., Peyser, Thomas A., McGarraugh, Geoffrey V.·2007·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE—The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of measurements of glucose in interstitial fluid made with the FreeStyle Navigator Continuous Glucose Monitoring System with Yellow Springs Instrument laboratory reference measurements of venous blood glucose. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Fifty-eight subjects with type 1 diabetes, aged 18–64 years, were enrolled in a multicenter, prospective, single-arm study. Each subject wore two sensors simultaneously, which were calibrated with capillary fingerstick measurements at 10, 12, 24, and 72 h after insertion. Measurements from the FreeStyle Navigator system were collected at 1-min intervals and compared with venous measurements taken once every 15 min for 50 h over the 5-day period of sensor wear in an in-patient clinical research center. Periods of high rates of change of glucose were induced by insulin and glucose challenges. RESULTS—Comparison of the FreeStyle Navigator measurements with the laboratory reference method (n = 20,362) gave mean and median absolute relative differences (ARDs) of 12.8 and 9.3%, respectively. The percentage in the clinically accurate Clarke error grid A zone was 81.7% and that in the in the benign error B zone was 16.7%. During low rates of change (<±1 mg · dl−1 · min−1), the percentage in the A zone was higher (84.9%) and the mean and median ARDs were lower (11.7 and 8.5%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS—Measurements with the FreeStyle Navigator system were found to be consistent and accurate compared with venous measurements made using a laboratory reference method over 5 days of sensor wear (82.5% in the A zone on day 1 and 80.9% on day 5).

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/dc06-1602

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 228

Metadata

Authors
Weinstein, R. L., Schwartz, S. L., Brazg, R. L., Bugler, J. R., Peyser, T. A., & McGarraugh, G. V.
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2007-05-01
Volume
30
Issue
5
Pages
1125-1130
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2129006534
Cited by
228
References
2
FWCI
16.37
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: Accuracy of the 5-Day FreeStyle Navigator Continuous Glucose Monitoring System. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2337/dc06-1602
The paper
Weinstein, R. L., Schwartz, S. L., Brazg, R. L., Bugler, J. R., Peyser, T. A., & McGarraugh, G. V. (2007). Accuracy of the 5-Day FreeStyle Navigator Continuous Glucose Monitoring System. Diabetes Care. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc06-1602

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.