Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 176

1.

Performance evaluation of a continuous glucose monitoring system under conditions similar to daily life.

Pleus S, Schmid C, Link M, Zschornack E, Klötzer HM, Haug C, Freckmann G.

J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2013 Jul 1;7(4):833-41.

2.

Performance evaluation of three continuous glucose monitoring systems: comparison of six sensors per subject in parallel.

Freckmann G, Pleus S, Link M, Zschornack E, Klötzer HM, Haug C.

J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2013 Jul 1;7(4):842-53.

3.

Evaluation of the performance of a novel system for continuous glucose monitoring.

Zschornack E, Schmid C, Pleus S, Link M, Klötzer HM, Obermaier K, Schoemaker M, Strasser M, Frisch G, Schmelzeisen-Redeker G, Haug C, Freckmann G.

J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2013 Jul 1;7(4):815-23.

4.

Rate-of-Change Dependence of the Performance of Two CGM Systems During Induced Glucose Swings.

Pleus S, Schoemaker M, Morgenstern K, Schmelzeisen-Redeker G, Haug C, Link M, Zschornack E, Freckmann G.

J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015 Jul;9(4):801-7. doi: 10.1177/1932296815578716. Epub 2015 Apr 7.

5.

Accuracy of two continuous glucose monitoring systems: a head-to-head comparison under clinical research centre and daily life conditions.

Kropff J, Bruttomesso D, Doll W, Farret A, Galasso S, Luijf YM, Mader JK, Place J, Boscari F, Pieber TR, Renard E, DeVries JH.

Diabetes Obes Metab. 2015 Apr;17(4):343-9. doi: 10.1111/dom.12378. Epub 2014 Sep 10.

6.

Performance evaluations of continuous glucose monitoring systems: precision absolute relative deviation is part of the assessment.

Obermaier K, Schmelzeisen-Redeker G, Schoemaker M, Klötzer HM, Kirchsteiger H, Eikmeier H, del Re L.

J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2013 Jul 1;7(4):824-32.

7.
8.

Integrated sensor-augmented pump therapy systems [the MiniMed® Paradigm™ Veo system and the Vibe™ and G4® PLATINUM CGM (continuous glucose monitoring) system] for managing blood glucose levels in type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Riemsma R, Corro Ramos I, Birnie R, Büyükkaramikli N, Armstrong N, Ryder S, Duffy S, Worthy G, Al M, Severens J, Kleijnen J.

Health Technol Assess. 2016 Feb;20(17):v-xxxi, 1-251. doi: 10.3310/hta20170. Review.

9.

Hypoglycemic Accuracy and Improved Low Glucose Alerts of the Latest Dexcom G4 Platinum Continuous Glucose Monitoring System.

Peyser TA, Nakamura K, Price D, Bohnett LC, Hirsch IB, Balo A.

Diabetes Technol Ther. 2015 Aug;17(8):548-54. doi: 10.1089/dia.2014.0415. Epub 2015 May 11.

PMID:
25961446
10.

Assessing sensor accuracy for non-adjunct use of continuous glucose monitoring.

Kovatchev BP, Patek SD, Ortiz EA, Breton MD.

Diabetes Technol Ther. 2015 Mar;17(3):177-86. doi: 10.1089/dia.2014.0272. Epub 2014 Dec 1.

11.

A new-generation continuous glucose monitoring system: improved accuracy and reliability compared with a previous-generation system.

Christiansen M, Bailey T, Watkins E, Liljenquist D, Price D, Nakamura K, Boock R, Peyser T.

Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013 Oct;15(10):881-8. doi: 10.1089/dia.2013.0077. Epub 2013 Jun 18.

12.

Model of glucose sensor error components: identification and assessment for new Dexcom G4 generation devices.

Facchinetti A, Del Favero S, Sparacino G, Cobelli C.

Med Biol Eng Comput. 2015 Dec;53(12):1259-69. doi: 10.1007/s11517-014-1226-y. Epub 2014 Nov 23.

PMID:
25416850
13.

Performance Comparison of CGM Systems: MARD Values Are Not Always a Reliable Indicator of CGM System Accuracy.

Kirchsteiger H, Heinemann L, Freckmann G, Lodwig V, Schmelzeisen-Redeker G, Schoemaker M, Del Re L.

J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015 Sep 1;9(5):1030-40. doi: 10.1177/1932296815586013. Print 2015 Sep.

14.

A clinical trial of the accuracy and treatment experience of the Dexcom G4 sensor (Dexcom G4 system) and Enlite sensor (guardian REAL-time system) tested simultaneously in ambulatory patients with type 1 diabetes.

Matuleviciene V, Joseph JI, Andelin M, Hirsch IB, Attvall S, Pivodic A, Dahlqvist S, Klonoff D, Haraldsson B, Lind M.

Diabetes Technol Ther. 2014 Nov;16(11):759-67. doi: 10.1089/dia.2014.0238. Epub 2014 Sep 18.

15.

Accuracy and reliability of continuous glucose monitoring systems: a head-to-head comparison.

Luijf YM, Mader JK, Doll W, Pieber T, Farret A, Place J, Renard E, Bruttomesso D, Filippi A, Avogaro A, Arnolds S, Benesch C, Heinemann L, DeVries JH; AP@home consortium.

Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013 Aug;15(8):722-7. doi: 10.1089/dia.2013.0049. Epub 2013 May 7.

16.

Influence of time point of calibration on accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring in individuals with type 1 diabetes.

Zueger T, Diem P, Mougiakakou S, Stettler C.

Diabetes Technol Ther. 2012 Jul;14(7):583-8. doi: 10.1089/dia.2011.0271. Epub 2012 Apr 18.

PMID:
22512266
17.

Accuracy assessment of online glucose monitoring by a subcutaneous enzymatic glucose sensor during exercise in patients with type 1 diabetes treated by continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion.

Radermecker RP, Fayolle C, Brun JF, Bringer J, Renard E.

Diabetes Metab. 2013 May;39(3):258-62. doi: 10.1016/j.diabet.2012.12.004. Epub 2013 Mar 19.

18.

A comparative effectiveness analysis of three continuous glucose monitors.

Damiano ER, El-Khatib FH, Zheng H, Nathan DM, Russell SJ.

Diabetes Care. 2013 Feb;36(2):251-9. doi: 10.2337/dc12-0070. Epub 2012 Dec 28.

19.

The Accuracy and Efficacy of the Dexcom G4 Platinum Continuous Glucose Monitoring System.

Nakamura K, Balo A.

J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015 Mar 23;9(5):1021-6. doi: 10.1177/1932296815577812.

20.

Multisite Study of an Implanted Continuous Glucose Sensor Over 90 Days in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus.

Dehennis A, Mortellaro MA, Ioacara S.

J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015 Jul 29;9(5):951-6. doi: 10.1177/1932296815596760.

Supplemental Content

Support Center