Dediabetes Logo
Preguntas
Respuestas publicadas conectadas con evidencia
Referencia clínica
Dossieres detallados de intervenciones y resultados
Investigacion reciente
Estudios mas recientes
Acerca de
Cómo funciona deDiabetes
Configuracion
Entrar / Unirse

CGM Time in Range

Ver informe de evidencia

Evidence on improving cgm time in range

Evidence related to CGM Time in Range.

Crea tu Evidence Workspace

Guarda evidencia sobre los temas que te importan.

97
Studies
100
Evidence Pairs
Extensive Research
Evidence Base: 71/100

Evidence guide

What does the evidence say?

Does Continuous glucose monitoring affect CGM Time in Range?

Current evidence does not establish a clear direction of effect for CGM Time in Range with Continuous glucose monitoring.

View answer

Does Insulin pump affect CGM Time in Range?

Current evidence does not establish a clear direction of effect for CGM Time in Range with Insulin pump.

View answer

Does Insulin therapy affect CGM Time in Range?

Current evidence does not establish a clear direction of effect for CGM Time in Range with Insulin therapy.

View answer
Evidence Intelligence™

Evidence Summary

A structured summary of where the evidence is strongest, mixed, or still emerging.

Executive Summary

CGM Time in Range evidence appears to center on Hybrid closed-loop system.

Among 97 indexed studies and 55 interventions, the strongest signals are summarized from the available evidence. Hybrid closed-loop system appears to be one of the clearer current evidence signals.

  • Evidence is consistently positive across multiple studies.
  • Some evidence is positive, but results are not consistent across all studies.
  • Early findings are encouraging, but stronger trials are needed.
Caution

This summary reflects the currently indexed evidence and should not be interpreted as treatment advice.

Key Finding

Evidence is consistently positive across multiple studies.

Interventions with strongest consistent evidence

Strongest consistent evidence

Why it matters

Consistent positive findings are easier to interpret than isolated or mixed results.

Interpretation

Hybrid closed-loop system appears to have a consistent beneficial signal in the indexed evidence.

View supporting studies
Evidence basis: 20 evidence pairs - 45 studies

Why this appears here

Strong evidenceGenerally consistentPositive effect signalMultiple RCTsModerate evidenceConsistent results
Hybrid closed-loop system
21 studies
EvidenceScore™
88/100
ConsistencyScore™
58/100
Continuous glucose monitoring
18 studies
EvidenceScore™
88/100
ConsistencyScore™
41/100

Evidence Snapshot

97
Studies
55
Interventions
10
Outcomes
7
Strong evidence signals
3
Mixed evidence areas

Key Findings

Key patterns and insights identified across the research landscape

Moderate positive signal

Hybrid closed-loop system may improve Time in range

Hybrid closed-loop system → Time in range

Across 21 studies, Hybrid closed-loop system shows a moderate positive signal for Time in range.

21 studies
EvidenceScore™: 87.73461538461538/100
View supporting studies
Moderate positive signal

Continuous glucose monitoring may improve Time in range

Continuous glucose monitoring → Time in range

Across 16 studies, Continuous glucose monitoring shows a moderate positive signal for Time in range.

16 studies
EvidenceScore™: 87.5625/100
View supporting studies
Evidence signal

Continuous glucose monitoring shows evidence for Time above range

Continuous glucose monitoring → Time above range

Across 5 studies, Continuous glucose monitoring shows a evidence signal for Time above range.

5 studies
EvidenceScore™: 82.6923076923077/100
View supporting studies
Moderate positive signal

Insulin therapy may improve Time in range

Insulin therapy → Time in range

Across 5 studies, Insulin therapy shows a moderate positive signal for Time in range.

5 studies
EvidenceScore™: 81.76923076923077/100
View supporting studies
Evidence signal

Continuous glucose monitoring shows evidence for Time below range

Continuous glucose monitoring → Time below range

Across 4 studies, Continuous glucose monitoring shows a consistent evidence signal for Time below range.

4 studies
EvidenceScore™: 79/100
View supporting studies

Supporting Evidence

Mixed or conflicting evidence

Some evidence is positive, but results are not consistent across all studies.

Areas where results are mixed

Why it matters

Mixed results suggest effects may depend on population, comparator, duration, or study design.

Interpretation

Hybrid closed-loop system is mixed in the currently indexed evidence.

Caution

Some supporting studies reported neutral, negative, or mixed findings.

Top entities

Hybrid closed-loop system
Continuous glucose monitoring
Hybrid closed-loop system
21 studies
EvidenceScore™
88/100
ConsistencyScore™
58/100

Why this appears here

Mixed Or Conflicting ResultsPositive Signal PresentNeutral Results PresentNegative Results Present
Evidence basis: 22 evidence pairs - 48 studies
View supporting studies
Promising but understudied

Early findings are encouraging, but stronger trials are needed.

Promising areas needing more evidence

Why it matters

Promising signals can guide further review, but they should not be treated as settled evidence.

Interpretation

DSMES may have a beneficial signal, but the evidence base is still developing.

Caution

Current support is limited by study volume, RCT depth, or evidence strength.

Top entities

DSMES
Aerobic exercise
DSMES
3 studies
EvidenceScore™
78/100
ConsistencyScore™
29/100

Why this appears here

Positive effect signalLimited study volume
Evidence basis: 12 evidence pairs - 13 studies
View supporting studies

Explore the Evidence

The sections below provide the complete evidence questions, supporting relationships, and underlying studies behind the summary above.

Preguntas respondidas por la evidencia

Which interventions have evidence for CGM Time in Range?

Continuous glucose monitoring, Insulin pump, and Insulin therapy are among the most studied approaches for CGM Time in Range.

Emerging Evidence · Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence. · 97 studies · 93 RCTs

The evidence includes both beneficial and harmful or worsening results.

View top evidence signals ↓
  1. Hybrid closed-loop system · Strong · 21 studies
  2. Continuous glucose monitoring · Strong · 18 studies
  3. Insulin therapy · Strong · 7 studies

Continuous glucose monitoring vs Insulin pump for CGM time in range?

Continuous glucose monitoring and Insulin pump have available evidence for CGM Time in Range, but the comparison requires review of the underlying studies.

Strong Evidence · Results are mixed and should be interpreted cautiously. · 21 studies · 21 RCTs

The evidence includes both beneficial and harmful or worsening results.

View top evidence signals ↓
  1. Continuous glucose monitoring · Strong · 18 studies
  2. Insulin pump · Strong · 3 studies
Browse all questions about CGM Time in Range

Overall Evidence Signals

Among 97 indexed studies and 55 interventions, the strongest signals are summarized from the available evidence. Hybrid closed-loop system appears to be one of the clearer current evidence signals.

  • Evidence is consistently positive across multiple studies.
  • Some evidence is positive, but results are not consistent across all studies.
  • Early findings are encouraging, but stronger trials are needed.

Evidence Relationships

Explore the intervention-outcome relationships with the strongest supporting evidence for CGM Time in Range.

12 strong relationships, ranked by available evidence

View every intervention-outcome relationship included in this topic.

Select any relationship to review its supporting studies.

Supporting Research

Selected studies that best represent the evidence behind this topic.

Click any study to view the full research summary, or click interventions and outcomes to filter Evidence Explorer.

Continue exploring

Related evidence briefs

Glycemic ControlDiabetes Technology

Evidence Tracker

Track CGM Time in Range evidence

Save this evidence topic and revisit it as new studies are added.