Effects of Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Glycemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Open accessAbstract
As the prevalence of diabetes is rapidly increasing, the use of continuous glucose monitoring, which is effective in improving glycemic control in type 2 diabetes, is increasing. Methods: Systematic review was performed according to PRISMA criteria. The search was conducted for articles published until 31 May 2023 in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, ClinicalKey, etc. The meta-analysis involved the synthesis of effect size; tests of homogeneity and heterogeneity; trim and fill plot; Egger’s regression test; and Begg’s test for assessing publication bias. Results: 491 studies were searched, of which 17 studies that met the selection criteria were analyzed. The overall effect on HbA1c was −0.37 (95% CI, −0.63~−0.11, p < 0.001), with HbA1c decreasing significantly after CGM interventions. Sub-analyses showed that the study was statistically significant in those aged 60 years or older, when rt-CGM was used and when the study was performed in multiple centers. Conclusion: The results of this study showed that intervention using CGM was effective in reducing HbA1c in type 2 diabetes. The factors identified in this study can be used as guidelines for developing future CGM intervention programs.
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?
Previous studies examining the use of CGM in patients with T2D over a 6-month period, without midpoint CGM measurements, found only a modest reduction in HbA1c.
“Similarly, previous studies examining the use of CGM in patients with T2D over a 6-month period, without midpoint CGM measurements, found only a modest reduction in HbA1c [10, 16].”
From Sequential use of continuous glucose monitoring, with or without exercise trackers, significantly improves glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes (2025) · cites this paper as [10]
The Results (§3.4; page unavailable) report a small overall reduction in HbA1c with CGM in patients with type 2 diabetes (Hedges’ g = −0.37). The Discussion (§4; page unavailable) discusses studies lasting at least 24 weeks, but does not say that six-month studies without midpoint CGM measurements specifically found only a modest reduction. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredA recent systematic review by Kong et al. reported an absolute change in HbA1c of up to −0.5% among T2D patients using real-time CGM.
“A recent systematic review by Kong et al. reported an absolute change in HbA1c of up to −0.5% among T2D patients using real-time CGM [10].”
From Sequential use of continuous glucose monitoring, with or without exercise trackers, significantly improves glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes (2025) · cites this paper as [10]
Results §3.4 reports a significant HbA1c reduction with real-time CGM, supporting the direction of the claim. It gives the overall CGM effect as Hedges’ g = −0.37, a standardized effect size—not an absolute HbA1c change of up to −0.5%. No such percentage-point figure appears in the retrieved passages; page numbers were unavailable. (LLM, conf=0.89)
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.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 43 · Cited by 36
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [10]Bae S.K. Development of Artificial Skin Phantom for Continuous Glucose Monitoring System Master’s Thesis Korea University Graduate School Seoul, Republic of Korea 2021
- [21]Hedges L.V. Olkin I. Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis Academic Press San Diego, CA, USA 2002
- Authors
- Kong, S.-Y., & Cho, M.-K.
- Affiliations
- Chungbuk National University Hospital (KR)
- Chungbuk National University (KR)
- Corresponding author
- Cho, Mi-Kyoung
- Venue
- Healthcare
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2024-02-29
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 571
- ISSN
- 2227-9032 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC10931178
- OpenAlex
- W4392359063
- Cited by
- 36
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 4
- FWCI
- 2.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Healthcare (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- 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
- continuous glucose monitoring, type 2 diabetes, glycemic control, HbA1c, real-time CGM, older adults
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
