Cited by 137Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Management and EducationDiabetes Treatment and Management

Improving the Clinical Value and Utility of CGM Systems: Issues and Recommendations

Open access
Petrie, John R., Peters, Anne L., Bergenstal, Richard M., Holl, Reinhard W., Fleming, G. Alexander, Heinemann, Lutz·2017·Diabetes Care

Abstract

The first systems for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) became available over 15 years ago. Many then believed CGM would revolutionize the use of intensive insulin therapy in diabetes; however, progress toward that vision has been gradual. Although increasing, the proportion of individuals using CGM rather than conventional systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose on a daily basis is still low in most parts of the world. Barriers to uptake include cost, measurement reliability (particularly with earlier-generation systems), human factors issues, lack of a standardized format for displaying results, and uncertainty on how best to use CGM data to make therapeutic decisions. This Scientific Statement makes recommendations for systemic improvements in clinical use and regulatory (pre- and postmarketing) handling of CGM devices. The aim is to improve safety and efficacy in order to support the advancement of the technology in achieving its potential to improve quality of life and health outcomes for more people 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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/dci17-0043

Cites

52 of 52 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?

  • In many countries, the benefits and utility of CGM are now recognized by national and international medical organizations for individuals with insulin-requiring diabetes and/or those at risk for hypoglycemia.

    “In many countries, the benefits and utility of CGM are now recognized by national and international medical organizations for individuals with insulin-requiring diabetes and/or those at risk for hypoglycemia (16-21).”

    From Clinical Targets for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data Interpretation: Recommendations From the International Consensus on Time in Range (2019) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Introduction and Background says the international diabetes community welcomed CGM, and Clinical evidence reports benefits for adults with type 1 diabetes, including reduced hypoglycemia. The paper is an ADA–EASD joint position statement, but its Cost-benefit and reimbursement section describes uneven coverage, and the copy does not establish recognition by medical organizations in many countries for the full population described. (LLM, conf=0.80)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

1 of the 53 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Gehr B, Holder M, Kulzer B, Lange K, Liebl A, Sahm C, von Sengbusch S, Schlüter S, Siegmund T, Thurm U, Ziegler R, Freckmann G, Heinemann L for the SPECTRUM Group. SPECTRUM: A Training and Treatment Program for Continuous Glucose Monitoring for All Age Groups. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2017; 11: 284-289.
  2. Messer L. AID training program from a CDE perspective (in press) (48) See: http://www.AGPreport.org (Accessed 27 th March 2017)
  3. Wong JC, Foster NC, Maahs DM, Raghinaru D, Bergenstal RM, Ahmann AJ, Peters AL, Bode BW, Aleppo G, Hirsch IB, Kleis L, Chase P, DuBose SN, Miller KM, Beck RW, Adi S. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) among participants in the T1D Exchange clinic registry. Diabetes Care 2014; 37: 2702-9.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Petrie, J. R., Peters, A. L., Bergenstal, R. M., Holl, R. W., Fleming, G. A., & Heinemann, L.
Affiliations
  • University of Glasgow (GB)
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • Park Nicollet Health Services (US)
  • Universität Ulm (DE)
  • Kinexum, Harpers Ferry, WV
  • Science & Co, Dusseldorf, Germany
Corresponding author
Petrie, John R.
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2017-10-25
Volume
40
Issue
12
Pages
1614-1621
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2766548367
Cited by
135
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 1
FWCI
2.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
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, diabetes management, intensive insulin therapy, measurement reliability, human factors, regulatory oversight, self-monitoring of blood glucose
MeSH terms
Blood Glucose, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Europe, Humans, Insulin, Insulin Infusion Systems, Quality of Life, Societies, Medical, United States, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Reproducibility of Results, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

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