Accuracy of a Continuous Glucose Monitoring System Under Hyperglycemic Challenge in Chinese Hospitalized Patients With Diabetes
Authors' conclusion
Continuous glucose monitoring maintained good accuracy during hyperglycemic challenges in hospitalized patients with diabetes. The time lag was influenced by the rate of glucose change, showing prolongation during the rapid glucose rise phase (0-60 minutes).
Study context
- Population
- Hospitalized adults (≥18 years) with type 1 and 2 DM
- Participants
- 116 adults580 CGM-PG pairs
- Comparison
- Sibionics continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) vs plasma glucose
- Outcome
- Accuracy: MARD, %15/15, %20/20, %30/30, %40/40 agreement rates
Methodological detailssteamed bread meal tolerance test (75 g carbohydrates)
- Steamed bread meal tolerance test (75 g carbohydrates)
Performance
As reported in the abstract
Accuracy of CGM vs PG during steamed bread meal tolerance test (SBMTT)
- Overall mean absolute relative difference (MARD)
- 11.83%
- %15/15 agreement rate
- 69.5%
- %20/20 agreement rate
- 86.2%
- %30/30 agreement rate
- 98.3%
- %40/40 agreement rate
- 99.7%
- Diabetes Technology Society (DTS) error grid: CGM points in zones A and B
- 100%
- DTS error grid: zone A
- 86%
- DTS error grid: zone B
- 14%
- Overall CGM lag time (after minimizing MARD)
- 5 minutes
- CGM lag time at 30 minutes (rapid glucose rise)
- 10 minutes
- CGM lag time at 60 minutes (rapid glucose rise)
- 20 minutes
Further findings
DTS error grid
- Zones A and B
- 100%
- Zone A
- 86%
- Zone B
- 14%
CGM lag time vs plasma glucose (PG)
Minutes
- Overall lag time
- 5
- Lag at 30 minutes
- 10
- Lag at 60 minutes
- 20
- After minimizing MARD; increased during rapid glucose rise (0-60 minutes)
Original publication
Accuracy of a Continuous Glucose Monitoring System Under Hyperglycemic Challenge in Chinese Hospitalized Patients With Diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. Published 23 May 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →