Última actualización 12 de julio de 2026
Key finding
Transitioning from SMBG to CGM significantly reduced the overall GRI by 9.8 units (95% CI −13.3, −6.3).
This study evaluated the impact of switching from self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) to continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in adults with Type 1 diabetes, finding significant improvements in glycaemic quality.
Quick read
The essential study design details in one scan.
EvidenceScore™
Moderate
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Medium-Term (3–12 mo)
Risk of bias
Some Concerns
Guarda investigacion, organiza estudios y vuelve a encontrar evidencia importante rapidamente.
Plain-language summary
A plain-language read of the study’s main message and where it applies.
Study focus
This study evaluated the impact of switching from self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) to continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in adults with Type 1 diabetes, finding significant improvements in glycaemic quality.
Improved glycaemic control is crucial for individuals with Type 1 diabetes, as it can reduce the risk of long-term complications such as cardiovascular disease, neuropathy, and retinopathy. The findings support the use of CGM technology as a more effective management tool for diabetes, potentially leading to better health outcomes and quality of life for patients.
The study's sample size may limit generalizability. The duration of the intervention was not specified. Potential biases in self-reported data could affect results.
Published in
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Daniel P, Sofia SI, Henrik I, David K, Marcus L. Switching from Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose to Continuous Glucose Monitoring Significantly Improves Glycaemic Quality in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes. Frontiers in Clinical Diabetes and Healthcare. 2026;7:1767987. doi:10.3389/fcdhc.2026.1767987
Transitioning to CGM reduced the overall GRI by 9.8 units (95% CI −13.3, −6.3).
The hypoglycaemia component of GRI decreased by −1.8 (95% CI −2.4, −1.2).
The hyperglycaemia component of GRI decreased by −2.8 (95% CI −5.3, −0.4).
85.4% of participants maintained or improved their GRI zone classification.
Evidence network
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
This study contributes evidence to Continuous glucose monitoring, Self-monitoring of blood glucose and GRI Zone Classification Maintenance or Improvement, Glycemia risk index.
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
Continuous glucose monitoring
Primary outcomes
Evidence topics
Primary intervention
Intervention and outcome relationships this study adds to the evidence network.
Editorial context
See why this paper is useful beyond its individual results.
Evidence network role
This section describes how the study fits into the current evidence network. It does not determine whether an intervention works on its own.
2
Related topics
3
Evidence pairs
298
Related studies
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Guarda estudios y paginas de evidencia, organiza tu Evidence Tracker y manten en un solo lugar la investigacion que te importa.
Evidencia principal
Relación de evidencia
Evidencia relacionada
Tema de evidencia
Guardar evidencia
Tema de evidencia
Guardar evidencia
Core evidence
The primary outcomes reported in this study.
Continuous glucose monitoring → Glycemia risk index
Continuous glucose monitoring → Glycemia risk index
Continuous glucose monitoring → GRI Zone Classification Maintenance or Improvement
Continuous glucose monitoring → GRI Zone Classification Maintenance or Improvement
Self-monitoring of blood glucose → Glycemia risk index
Self-monitoring of blood glucose → Glycemia risk index
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Explore related studies, evidence collections, and research questions.
Relationships organized using the Dediabetes Evidence Intelligence™ framework.
This study contributes to evidence on Insulin Delivery Systems and CGM Time in Range, Insulin Delivery Systems and GRI Zone Classification Maintenance or Improvement.
This study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.
Devices & Technology
Devices & Technology
Curated evidence collections and hubs this study is part of.
All studies measuring CGM Time in Range
Measures CGM Time in Range as a key outcome.
All studies measuring GRI Zone Classification Maintenance or Improvement
Measures GRI Zone Classification Maintenance or Improvement as a key outcome.
All studies on Insulin Delivery Systems
Contributes to Insulin Delivery Systems evidence base.
Latest published studies
Published within the last 2 years.
Jump to pre-filtered views in Evidence Explorer.
1 results
1 results
1 results
1 results
1 results
Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.
Insulin Delivery Systems may improve CGM Time in Range.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are generally consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
Glycemia risk index
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 17 supporting studies with generally consistent results and a positive effect signal.
Limitations
Continuous glucose monitoring appears to improve GRI Zone Classification Maintenance or Improvement.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
GRI Zone Classification Maintenance or Improvement
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Self-monitoring of blood glucose for Glycemia risk index.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Glycemia risk index
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Next steps
Choose a next path through related evidence topics, Evidence Explorer views, and research summaries.
Follow the topics this study contributes to.
Open broader Evidence Explorer views for this relationship.
Read related research summaries.
Focused on evidence, not advertising.
Your data is always protected.
New studies added every day.
