Estimating Glycemia From Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM): Analysis of Accuracy and Sources of Discrepancy
Authors' conclusion
The accuracy of estimates of eAG90 from limited periods of CGM can be improved by averaging with an HbA1c-based estimate or extending the monitoring period beyond ∼26 days. Large mismatches between eAG90 estimated from CGM and HbA1c are not unusual and may persist due to stable nonglycemic factors.
Study context
- Population
- Adults (86% T1D) with 90-day CGM periods with <10% missing data and paired HbA1c measurements985 CGM periods
- Participants
- 315 adults
- Comparison
- 14-day CGM vs HbA1c vs their combination for estimating 90-day mean glycemia
- Outcome
- Accuracy (mean absolute error vs corrected reference eAG90) for estimating mean glycemia over 90 days
- Follow-up
- 90 days
Performance
As reported in the abstract
Mean absolute error (95th percentile) vs eAG90
Further findings
- Mismatches between CGM and HbA1c >40 mg/dL occurred
- more than 5% of the time
Original publication
Estimating Glycemia From HbA1c and CGM: Analysis of Accuracy and Sources of Discrepancy. Diabetes Care. Published 23 February 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →