Variation of interstitial glucose measurements assessed by continuous glucose monitors in healthy, nondiabetic individuals
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To characterize glucose levels during daily living using continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) in nondiabetic individuals. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Seventy-four healthy children, adolescents, and adults aged 9–65 years with normal glucose tolerance used a blinded CGM device for 3 to 7 days. RESULTS: Sensor glucose concentrations were 71–120 mg/dl for 91% of the day. Sensor values were ≤60 or >140 mg/dl for only 0.2% and 0.4% of the day, respectively. Sensor glucose concentrations were slightly higher in children than adults (P = 0.009) and were slightly lower during the night than day (95 vs. 99 mg/dl, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Glucose values ≤60 and >140 mg/dl, measured with CGM, are uncommon in healthy, nondiabetic individuals. CGM may be useful to evaluate glucose tolerance in nondiabetic individuals over time. Furthermore, these data provide a basis for comparison for studies that use CGM to assess glucose control in subjects with diabetes.
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
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.
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?
Most studies of CGM profiles in healthy, nondiabetic individuals have had small sample sizes or used early-generation CGM systems, which were less accurate than current devices.
“Most studies of CGM profiles in healthy, nondiabetic individuals have had small sample sizes or used early-generation CGM systems, which were less accurate than current devices (3)(4)(5)(6)(7).”
From Continuous Glucose Monitoring Profiles in Healthy Nondiabetic Participants: A Multicenter Prospective Study (2019) · cites this paper as [5]
The Abstract’s Research Design and Methods describes a CGM study of 74 healthy participants. Research Design and Methods identifies the devices used and reports missing or implausible readings from one sensor, noting that a commercially available version had newer software. The paper does not establish that most such studies had small samples or that earlier devices were less accurate than current devices. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe overall results of this study are in agreement with previous studies despite the different generations of CGM systems used in most of the studies.
“The overall results of our study are in agreement with previous studies (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)17) despite the different generations of CGM systems used in most of the studies.”
From Continuous Glucose Monitoring Profiles in Healthy Nondiabetic Participants: A Multicenter Prospective Study (2019) · cites this paper as [5]
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
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [1]Zhou J Li H Ran X Yang W Li Q Peng Y Li Y Gao X Luan X Wang W Jia W: Reference values for continuous glucose monitoring in Chinese subjects. Diabetes Care 2009; 32: 1188– 1193 19389816 PMC2699703
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Shah, V. N., DuBose, S. N., Li, Z., Beck, R. W., Peters, A. L., Weinstock, R. S., Kruger, D., Tansey, M., Sparling, D., Woerner, S., et al. (2019) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/jc.2018-02763 · Cited by 315 · see citing works
Vantyghem, M.-C., Raverdy, V., Balavoine, A.-S., Defrance, F., Caiazzo, R., Arnalsteen, L., Gmyr, V., Hazzan, M., Noël, C., Kerr-Conte, J., et al. (2012) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/jc.2012-2115 · Cited by 103 · see citing works
Use of Continuous Glucose Monitors by People Without Diabetes: An Idea Whose Time Has Come?
Klonoff, D. C., Nguyen, K. T., Xu, N. Y., Gutierrez, A., Espinoza, J. C., & Vidmar, A. P. (2023) · Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology · doi:10.1177/19322968221110830 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
- Authors
- Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group
- Corresponding author
- Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group
- Venue
- Diabetes Care
- Publisher
- American Diabetes Association
- Published
- 2010-03-09
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1297-1299
- ISSN
- 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-5548
- PMC
- PMC2875442
- OpenAlex
- W1529159160
- Cited by
- 138
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 5.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Diabetes Care (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K08DK082386)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
- Keywords
- interstitial glucose, continuous glucose monitoring, non-diabetic individuals, normal glucose tolerance, children and adolescents, nocturnal glucose, reference values
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Blood Glucose, Child, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring, Monitoring, Ambulatory, Young Adult
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
