Evaluation of a Novel Continuous Glucose Measurement Device in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus across the Glycemic Range

Performance Evaluation of a Continuous Glucose Monitoring System under Conditions Similar to Daily Life

“…[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]17,[21][22][23] Continuous glucose monitoring performance often was reported to be poor in the low glucose range. 8,10,12,17,19,23 For G4, however, the MARD was only slightly worse (i.e., higher) than in the other concentration ranges, and it was markedly lower than that of other CGM devices. 8,13,17,27 When compared with three CGM systems investigated in a very similar setting [the G4's predecessor SEVEN ® Plus system (Dexcom, San Diego, CA), FreeStyle Navigator™ (Abbott Diabetes Care, Alameda, CA), and Guardian ® REAL-Time (Medtronic MiniMed, Northridge, CA)], 27 an improved performance can be noted.…”

“…Numerous studies about performance of CGM systems have been published, [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24] but only one employed the recommendations of POCT05-A, 18 and none of these studies investigated the CGM system used here.…”

Performance Evaluation of Three Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems: Comparison of Six Sensors Per Subject in Parallel

“…With the Navigator and the Seven Plus, PARD seemed to slightly improve with sensor usage time. The performance of all systems within the hypoglycemic range (<70 mg/dl) was markedly lower than at higher glucose concentrations, a known fact 3,5,7,12,14,18 that is still dissatisfying for CGM users. While the Guardian achieved a slightly lower MARD than the Seven Plus, its PARD was slightly higher.…”

“…In 2008, the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute published POCT05-A, which provides recommendations for study design and parameters of interest in the performance evaluation of CGM systems. 1 Multiple studies investigating CGM systems were published over the years; [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] only one claimed to use procedures recommended in POCT05-A. 13 A comparison of these studies, however, is difficult due to variations in subject groups 11 and study design, including use of different devices for calibration of CGM systems and for reference measurements, either overall or for different study phases.…”

The Accuracy and Efficacy of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Sensor in Chinese Diabetes Patients: A Multicenter Study

“…The venous blood glucose level is the gold standard for assessing the accuracy of CGM. [8][9][10] However, the current standard for assessing the accuracy of CGM data in the Chinese population is mainly based on self-monitoring of blood glucose. 11 Few studies have performed systematic evaluation of blood glucose levels using frequent venous blood collection in patients with diabetes mellitus.…”