Last updated September 9, 2026
Key finding
There were no significant differences in the proportion of pregnant women diagnosed with GDM in the unblinded group compared to the blinded groups (21.5 vs. 14.9%; p > 0.05).
This pilot randomized controlled trial evaluated the effects of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with feedback in pregnant women. No significant differences were found in gestational diabetes rates between groups.
Quick read
The essential study design details in one scan.
EvidenceScore™
Moderate
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Short-Term (≤3 mo)
Risk of bias
Some Concerns
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Plain-language summary
A plain-language read of the study’s main message and where it applies.
Study focus
This pilot randomized controlled trial evaluated the effects of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with feedback in pregnant women. No significant differences were found in gestational diabetes rates between groups.
Understanding the effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring in managing gestational diabetes is crucial for improving maternal and fetal health outcomes. This study provides insights into whether real-time feedback from glucose monitoring can lead to better management of glucose levels during pregnancy, which is essential for preventing complications associated with gestational diabetes.
Limited sample size may affect the generalizability of the findings. The study did not measure long-term outcomes related to glucose management. Potential confounding factors were not fully controlled.
Published in
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Phaik LQ, Lay KT, Ngee L, et al. Continuous Glucose Monitoring Feedback in Pregnant Women: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. American Journal of Perinatology. 2024;41(Suppl 1):e3374-e3382. doi:10.1055/s-0043-1778664
No significant difference in GDM rates between unblinded (21.5%) and blinded groups (14.9%; p > 0.05).
Plasma glucose at 0 hours was lower in the unblinded group (4.2 vs. 4.3; p > 0.05).
Plasma glucose at 1 hour was higher in the unblinded group (7.7 vs. 7.5; p > 0.05).
Plasma glucose at 2 hours was higher in the unblinded group (6.3 vs. 6.2; p > 0.05).
Evidence network
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
This study contributes evidence to Continuous glucose monitoring and 1-hour glucose level, 2-hour plasma glucose, Blood glucose, and 1 more.
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
Continuous glucose monitoring
Primary outcomes
Primary intervention
Primary outcomes
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.
5
Related topics
4
Evidence pairs
1226
Related studies
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Save studies and evidence pages, organize your personal Evidence Tracker, and keep the research you care about in one place.
Primary evidence
Evidence relationship
Related evidence
Evidence relationship
Save evidence
Evidence relationship
Save evidence
Core evidence
The primary outcomes reported in this study.
Continuous glucose monitoring → 1-hour glucose level
Continuous glucose monitoring → 1-hour glucose level
Continuous glucose monitoring → 2-hour plasma glucose
Continuous glucose monitoring → 2-hour plasma glucose
Continuous glucose monitoring → Blood glucose
Continuous glucose monitoring → Blood glucose
Continuous glucose monitoring → Gestational diabetes mellitus incidence
Continuous glucose monitoring → Gestational diabetes mellitus incidence
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 Postprandial and OGTT Glucose, Insulin Delivery Systems and 1-hour glucose level.
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 on Insulin Delivery Systems
Contributes to Insulin Delivery Systems evidence base.
All studies measuring Postprandial and OGTT Glucose
Measures Postprandial and OGTT Glucose as a key outcome.
All studies measuring 1-hour glucose level
Measures 1-hour glucose level as a key outcome.
Latest published studies
Published within the last 2 years.
Jump to pre-filtered views in Evidence Explorer.
3 results
1 results
3 results
3 results
1 results
Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.
Insulin Delivery Systems may improve fasting glucose.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
Blood glucose
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 9 supporting studies with consistent results and a positive effect signal.
Insulin Delivery Systems may improve postprandial and ogtt glucose.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are mixed and should be interpreted cautiously.
Ranked evidence signals
2-hour plasma glucose
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 78.0 | moderate positive | ConsistencyScore™ Generally Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is cautious because the available studies report mixed findings.
Current evidence does not show a clear reduction in diabetes incidence and prevention with Insulin Delivery Systems.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Gestational diabetes mellitus incidence
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | neutral | 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 Continuous glucose monitoring for 1-hour glucose level.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
1-hour glucose level
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.
