95-OR: Impact of Flash Glucose Monitoring in People with Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled with Noninsulin Antihyperglycemic Therapy: IMMEDIATE study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to improve glycemic outcomes in people with diabetes using insulin therapies. In this multi-site, randomized trial, we studied adults with T2D inadequately controlled with non-insulin antihyperglycemic therapy to evaluate the impact of flash glucose monitoring (FGM) on glycemic and patient-reported outcomes. Participants received FGM + diabetes self-management education (DSME) or matched DSME alone for 16 weeks. Primary outcome was assessed by a blinded CGM device worn at baseline and at outcome. Among 116 participants enrolled (age 58.4 ± 10.1 years; T2D duration 10.1 ± 6.1 years; HbA1c 8.6 ± 1.1%) , the initial 82 completers (41 FGM + DSME, 41 DSME) showed time in range significantly greater in the FGM + DSME arm (76.1 ± 16.9%) compared to DSME arm (64.3 ± 23.2%) (p<0.01) . Time above range was similarly lower in the FGM + DSME arm (21.5 ± 17.8% vs. 31.3 ± 25.6%, p=0.03) . Hypoglycemia was rare in both arms. Glucose monitoring satisfaction scores improved in the FGM + DSME arm only (0.6 ± 0.5 vs. 0.0 ± 0.5, p<0.01) . Change in HbA1c was also greater in the FGM + DSME arm (-0.9 ± 0.9% vs. -0.5 ± 0.9%, p=0.03) . In this interim analysis, FGM users with T2D using non-insulin therapies had significantly greater time in range, satisfaction with glucose monitoring, and a greater reduction in HbA1c. Disclosure R.E.Brown: None. R.Aronson: Consultant; AstraZeneca, Becton, Dickinson and Company, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, Inc., HTL Strefa, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Research Support; AstraZeneca, Bausch Health, Canada, Bayer AG, Becton, Dickinson and Company, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Dexcom, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Insulet Corporation, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Kowa Pharmaceuticals America, Inc., Medpace, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc., Xeris Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Zealand Pharma A/S. Funding Abbott Diabetes Care, Inc.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".