Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2013 Mar;15(3):253-9.
doi: 10.1089/dia.2012.0265. Epub 2013 Feb 15.

Assessing the quality of publications evaluating the accuracy of blood glucose monitoring systems

Affiliations
Review

Assessing the quality of publications evaluating the accuracy of blood glucose monitoring systems

Gary H Thorpe. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013 Mar.

Abstract

Many studies determine the performance of blood glucose monitoring (BG) systems. Correct evaluation is, however, complex, and apparent contradiction of results creates confusion. This study aimed to provide an overview of frequently made errors and to develop easy-to-use checklists to verify the quality of such studies. Building on the work from Mahoney and Ellison and subsequent re-evaluation, study designs of accuracy studies were assessed, and best practice and internationally accepted norms were determined. Key issues were collated, and two simplified checklists were developed: one for the assessment of analytical accuracy studies and a second for guidance with studies assessing the influence of interferences. The checklists have been used in a feasibility study with 20 representative studies selected from a literature search between 2007 and 2012. This check revealed that limitations in the designs and methods of studies assessing the performance of BG systems are common. The use of the accuracy checklist with the 20 representative studies showed that only 20% were in agreement with most of the issues deemed important and that 40% showed clear nonconcordance with ISO 15197. The use of the interference checklist showed that only 50% of the publications were in good agreement with the quality checks. In agreement with previous studies, which concluded many evaluations are performed poorly and present questionable conclusions, the use of these checklists demonstrated that few publications adhered to international guidelines and recommendations. Taking this into consideration, it becomes obvious that the publications must be examined in more detail to establish their quality and the validity of conclusions drawn.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.
Number of publications assessing the performance of several blood glucose systems between 2004 and 2011.

References

    1. Mahoney J. Ellison J. Assessing the quality of glucose monitor studies: a critical evaluation of published reports. Clin Chem. 2007;53:1122–1128. - PubMed
    1. Mahoney JJ. Ellison JM. Assessing glucose monitor performance—a standardized approach. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2007;9:545–552. - PubMed
    1. Baum JM. Pardo SA. Schachner HC. Parkes JL. Simmons DA. Re-evaluating a standard approach to assessing glucose monitor performance. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2009;11:323–325. - PubMed
    1. Nichols JH. What is accuracy and how close must the agreement be? Diabetes Technol Ther. 2005;7:558–562. - PubMed
    1. Binette TM. Cembrowski GS. Diverse influences on blood glucose measurements in the ICU setting. Chest. 2005;128:3084–3085. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources