Impact of Missing Data and Monitoring Duration on Downstream Analyses in Continuous Glucose Monitoring
Authors' conclusion
Representing 90 days of glycemic exposure with 14 days can lead to bias and loss of precision in downstream analyses. We recommend study protocols require at least 30 days of CGM with 70% completeness. If 30 days is not feasible, studies should plan for increased sample sizes.
Study context
- Population
- T1D cohort with complete 90-day continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) profilescomplete 90-day CGM profiles
- Participants
- 1,010 participants
- Comparison
- CGM metrics from incomplete or reduced monitoring vs 90-day complete profile
- Outcome
- TIR as outcome of binary treatment (clinical trial setting): sample size increase required to maintain precision
Methodological detailssimulated incomplete CGM profiles, measurement error propagated into downstream regression models
- Simulated incomplete CGM profiles
- Measurement error propagated into downstream regression models
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
14 days
≥16% more participants
30 days
≥6.5%
Further findings
| Outcome | 14 days | 30 days |
|---|---|---|
| TIR as covariate: attenuation of associations with outcomes (bias toward zero) | up to 14% | 6% |
Time in range (TIR) as covariate: attenuation of associations with outcomes (bias toward zero)
- Associations attenuated and less precise
Original publication
Impact of Missing Data and Monitoring Duration on Downstream Analyses in Continuous Glucose Monitoring. Diabetes Care. Published 30 March 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →