Dediabetes Logo
Questions
Published answers connected to evidence
Clinical Reference
Detailed intervention and outcome dossiers
Latest Research
Newest studies
About
How deDiabetes works
Settings
Login / Sign-up
Research Summary
Analyzed using Evidence Intelligence™

DIY RT-CGM improves glycemic control in children with T1D

Powered by the Dediabetes Evidence Intelligence™ framework

Last updated August 29, 2026

Key finding

Time-in-range was significantly higher with DIY RT-CGM over isCGM, mean difference, 5.7% (95%CI 1.8, 9.6, p <0.004)

This study evaluated the effectiveness of DIY real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) in children with type 1 diabetes compared to isCGM plus usual care. DIY RT-CGM showed significant improvements in time in range and parental satisfaction.

Quick read

Study at a glance

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

What this paper says

A plain-language read of the study’s main message and where it applies.

Study focus

This study evaluated the effectiveness of DIY real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) in children with type 1 diabetes compared to isCGM plus usual care. DIY RT-CGM showed significant improvements in time in range and parental satisfaction.

Clinical relevance

These findings are significant as they suggest that DIY RT-CGM can enhance diabetes management in children, potentially leading to better health outcomes. Improved parental satisfaction may also encourage adherence to diabetes care, which is crucial for managing type 1 diabetes effectively.

Keep in mind

Study design may limit generalizability of findings. Sample size and characteristics were not detailed. Potential unmeasured confounders may affect results.

Published in

Journal Reference

Publication details and source links for this paper.

Mona ME, Sara S, Jillian JH, et al. The use of DIY real-time continuous glucose monitoring in children with type 1 diabetes: a randomized controlled crossover trial. Pediatric Diabetes. 2022;23(4):480-488. doi:10.1111/pedi.13331

View DOIView on PubMedView on PMC

Main Effects

DIY RT-CGM significantly increased time in range by 5.7% (95%CI 1.8, 9.6, p <0.004).

Parent diabetes treatment satisfaction was significantly higher with DIY RT-CGM, mean difference 5.3 (95%CI: 2.3, 8.2, p <0.001).

There was no significant change in parental fear of hypoglycemia (p = 0.4).

Evidence network

How this study fits

Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.

Evidence Context

This study contributes evidence to DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring, Usual care and Oxford Maternity Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction (OMDTSQ) score, Parental Fear of Hypoglycemia, Time in range.

This study contributes evidence to

Intervention

DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring

Outcome

Oxford Maternity Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction (OMDTSQ) score

Evidence topic

CGM Time in Range

Primary intervention

DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring

Primary outcomes

  • Oxford Maternity Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction (OMDTSQ) score
  • Parental Fear of Hypoglycemia
  • Time in range

Evidence topics

CGM Time in RangeGlycemic Control

Primary intervention

DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring

Primary outcomes

Oxford Maternity Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction (OMDTSQ) scoreParental Fear of HypoglycemiaTime in range

Evidence relationships

Intervention and outcome relationships this study adds to the evidence network.

6
Evidence pairs
6
Relationships
2
Evidence topics
contributes_evidence

Editorial context

Why this study matters

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.

Moderate contributionModerate confidenceNetwork score: 64

2

Related topics

6

Evidence pairs

581

Related studies

High relevance in at least one topic

Why it is useful

  • Contributes to 6 evidence relationships
  • Includes primary outcome data
  • Linked to 2 direct semantic evidence topics

Topic contributions

Evidence topic

Contributes evidence

Evidence topic

Contributes evidence

Add related evidence to your Evidence Tracker

Save studies and evidence pages, organize your personal Evidence Tracker, and keep the research you care about in one place.

Primary evidence

Evidence topic

CGM Time in Range

matched_outcome

Related evidence

Evidence topic

Glycemic Control

Save evidence

Core evidence

Study findings

The primary outcomes reported in this study.

Oxford Maternity Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction (OMDTSQ) score

DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring → Oxford Maternity Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction (OMDTSQ) score

DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring → Oxford Maternity Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction (OMDTSQ) score

Evidence Intelligence™
EvidenceScore™
Emerging
Score 59 · Based on 1 study
ImpactScore™
100
Very Positive
ConsistencyScore™
unclear
Not enough independent studies
Supporting studies: Based on 1 study
Add to Evidence Tracker

Parental Fear of Hypoglycemia

DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring → Parental Fear of Hypoglycemia

DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring → Parental Fear of Hypoglycemia

Evidence Intelligence™
EvidenceScore™
Emerging
Score 59 · Based on 1 study
ImpactScore™
50
Neutral
ConsistencyScore™
unclear
Not enough independent studies
Supporting studies: Based on 1 study
Add to Evidence Tracker

Time in range

DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring → Time in range

DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring → Time in range

Evidence Intelligence™
EvidenceScore™
Emerging
Score 59 · Based on 1 study
ImpactScore™
100
Very Positive
ConsistencyScore™
unclear
Not enough independent studies
Supporting studies: Based on 1 study
Add to Evidence Tracker

Oxford Maternity Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction (OMDTSQ) score

Usual care → Oxford Maternity Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction (OMDTSQ) score

Usual care → Oxford Maternity Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction (OMDTSQ) score

Evidence Intelligence™
EvidenceScore™
Emerging
Score 59 · Based on 1 study
ImpactScore™
50
Neutral
ConsistencyScore™
unclear
Not enough independent studies
Supporting studies: Based on 1 study
Add to Evidence Tracker

Parental Fear of Hypoglycemia

Usual care → Parental Fear of Hypoglycemia

Usual care → Parental Fear of Hypoglycemia

Evidence Intelligence™
EvidenceScore™
Emerging
Score 59 · Based on 1 study
ImpactScore™
50
Neutral
ConsistencyScore™
unclear
Not enough independent studies
Supporting studies: Based on 1 study
Add to Evidence Tracker

Time in range

Usual care → Time in range

Usual care → Time in range

Evidence Intelligence™
EvidenceScore™
78
Strong
ImpactScore™
50
Neutral
ConsistencyScore™
100
consistent
Supporting studies: Based on 3 studies
Add to Evidence Tracker

Evidence Library

Build your evidence library

Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.

evidence suggest

Evidence Suggest

  • DIY RT-CGM improved time in range by 5.7%.
  • Parental satisfaction increased significantly with DIY RT-CGM.
  • No change in parental fear of hypoglycemia was observed.
who this applies

Who this applies to

  • Children diagnosed with type 1 diabetes.
  • Parents or guardians managing diabetes care.
keep in mind

Keep in Mind

  • Results may not apply to all children with diabetes.
  • The study did not measure long-term effects of interventions.
  • Parental fear of hypoglycemia remained unchanged, which may impact care.
between the lines

Between the Lines

  • Study design may limit generalizability of findings.
  • Sample size and characteristics were not detailed.
  • Potential unmeasured confounders may affect results.

Evidence Library

Build your evidence library

Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.

Connected Evidence

Explore related studies, evidence collections, and research questions.

Relationships organized using the Dediabetes Evidence Intelligence™ framework.

Powered by the Dediabetes Evidence Intelligence™ framework

This study contributes to evidence on Usual care and CGM Time in Range, DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring and Treatment Experience.

Related evidence relationships

Explore in Evidence Explorer

This study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.

Questions answered by this study

Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.

Does Usual care improve time in range?

Strong Evidence

Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Usual care for time in range.

ConsistencyScore™: Results are consistent across studies.

Ranked evidence signals

  1. 1

    Time in range

    EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 78.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Consistent | 1 study

Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.

Limitations

  • Only one supporting study is available.
1 supporting study
View Full Evidence

Does DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring improve oxford maternity diabetes treatment satisfaction (OMDTSQ) score?

Emerging Evidence

DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring appears to improve oxford maternity diabetes treatment satisfaction (OMDTSQ) score.

ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.

Ranked evidence signals

  1. 1

    Oxford Maternity Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction (OMDTSQ) score

    EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study

Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.

Limitations

  • Only one supporting study is available.
1 supporting study
View Full Evidence

Does DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring improve time in range?

Emerging Evidence

DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring appears to improve time in range.

ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.

Ranked evidence signals

  1. 1

    Time in range

    EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study

Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.

Limitations

  • Only one supporting study is available.
1 supporting study
View Full Evidence

Does DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring affect parental fear of hypoglycemia?

Emerging Evidence

Current evidence does not show a clear effect of DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring on parental fear of hypoglycemia.

ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.

Ranked evidence signals

  1. 1

    Parental Fear of Hypoglycemia

    EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study

Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.

Limitations

  • Only one supporting study is available.
1 supporting study
View Full Evidence
Learn how Evidence Intelligence™ works

Next steps

Continue your research

Choose a next path through related evidence topics, Evidence Explorer views, and research summaries.

Evidence topics

Follow the topics this study contributes to.

CGM Time in Range Evidence HubGlycemic Control Evidence Hub

Explore in Evidence Explorer

Open broader Evidence Explorer views for this relationship.

All studies on DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring and Parental Fear of HypoglycemiaAll studies on Usual care and Parental Fear of HypoglycemiaAll studies on Usual care and Time in rangeAll studies on DIY RT-CGM with parental remote monitoring and Oxford Maternity Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction (OMDTSQ) score

Related research

Read related research summaries.

Educational intervention improves glycemic control in type 2 diabetes patientsQCC Model Enhances Diabetes ManagementExercise program improves function in older adults with diabetes.Music Therapy Improves Cognition and Quality of Life in Diabetic ElderlyPhone-delivered diabetes education improves self-care behaviors

No ads. No tracking.

Focused on evidence, not advertising.

Secure & private

Your data is always protected.

Always up to date

New studies added every day.