These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
193 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20022127)
41. [Indication of CGMS (Continuous Glucose Monitoring System) in the functionnal investigations of adult type 1 diabetic patients]. Melki V; Hanaire-Broutin H Diabetes Metab; 2001 Nov; 27(5 Pt 1):618-23. PubMed ID: 11694864 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Accuracy evaluation of contour next compared with five blood glucose monitoring systems across a wide range of blood glucose concentrations occurring in a clinical research setting. Klaff LJ; Brazg R; Hughes K; Tideman AM; Schachner HC; Stenger P; Pardo S; Dunne N; Parkes JL Diabetes Technol Ther; 2015 Jan; 17(1):8-15. PubMed ID: 25260047 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Accuracy of a Fourth-Generation Continuous Glucose Monitoring System in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes. Slover RH; Tryggestad JB; DiMeglio LA; Fox LA; Bode BW; Bailey TS; Brazg R; Christiansen MP; Sherr JL; Tsalikian E; Kaiserman KB; Sullivan A; Huang S; Shin J; Lee SW; Kaufman FR Diabetes Technol Ther; 2018 Sep; 20(9):576-584. PubMed ID: 30063162 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Accuracy of Intra-arterial and Subcutaneous Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Postoperative Cardiac Surgery Patients in the ICU. Sechterberger MK; van der Voort PH; Strasma PJ; DeVries JH J Diabetes Sci Technol; 2015 May; 9(3):663-7. PubMed ID: 25539652 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Performance and Usability of Three Systems for Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Direct Comparison. Freckmann G; Link M; Kamecke U; Haug C; Baumgartner B; Weitgasser R J Diabetes Sci Technol; 2019 Sep; 13(5):890-898. PubMed ID: 30730229 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Clinical accuracy of a continuous glucose monitoring system with an advanced algorithm. Bailey TS; Chang A; Christiansen M J Diabetes Sci Technol; 2015 Mar; 9(2):209-14. PubMed ID: 25370149 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Evaluation of a combined blood glucose monitoring and gaming system (Didget®) for motivation in children, adolescents, and young adults with type 1 diabetes. Klingensmith GJ; Aisenberg J; Kaufman F; Halvorson M; Cruz E; Riordan ME; Varma C; Pardo S; Viggiani MT; Wallace JF; Schachner HC; Bailey T Pediatr Diabetes; 2013 Aug; 14(5):350-7. PubMed ID: 21699639 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. The chemistry of commercial continuous glucose monitors. McGarraugh G Diabetes Technol Ther; 2009 Jun; 11 Suppl 1():S17-24. PubMed ID: 19469674 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Modeling the glucose sensor error. Facchinetti A; Del Favero S; Sparacino G; Castle JR; Ward WK; Cobelli C IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2014 Mar; 61(3):620-9. PubMed ID: 24108706 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Modeling the error of continuous glucose monitoring sensor data: critical aspects discussed through simulation studies. Facchinetti A; Sparacino G; Cobelli C J Diabetes Sci Technol; 2010 Jan; 4(1):4-14. PubMed ID: 20167162 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. System accuracy evaluation of 27 blood glucose monitoring systems according to DIN EN ISO 15197. Freckmann G; Baumstark A; Jendrike N; Zschornack E; Kocher S; Tshiananga J; Heister F; Haug C Diabetes Technol Ther; 2010 Mar; 12(3):221-31. PubMed ID: 20151773 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. 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. PubMed ID: 23275350 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. 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; 9(5):1030-40. PubMed ID: 26330485 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Minimizing the impact of time lag variability on accuracy evaluation of continuous glucose monitoring systems. Scuffi C; Lucarelli F; Valgimigli F J Diabetes Sci Technol; 2012 Nov; 6(6):1383-91. PubMed ID: 23294784 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Enhancing the accuracy of subcutaneous glucose sensors: a real-time deconvolution-based approach. Guerra S; Facchinetti A; Sparacino G; Nicolao GD; Cobelli C IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2012 Jun; 59(6):1658-69. PubMed ID: 22481799 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Comparison of Two Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems, Dexcom G4 Platinum and Medtronic Paradigm Veo Enlite System, at Rest and During Exercise. Taleb N; Emami A; Suppere C; Messier V; Legault L; Chiasson JL; Rabasa-Lhoret R; Haidar A Diabetes Technol Ther; 2016 Sep; 18(9):561-7. PubMed ID: 27356172 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Analysis: The Accuracy and Efficacy of the Dexcom G4 Platinum Continuous Glucose Monitoring System. van Beers CA; DeVries JH J Diabetes Sci Technol; 2015 Apr; 9(5):1027-9. PubMed ID: 25917336 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]