Comparing effects of continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGMs) and self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) amongst adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review protocol

Mingyue Zheng, Yunting Luo, Wei Lin, Adeel Khoja, Qian He, Shenqiao Yang, Xuan Zhao, Peng Hu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)


Background: Continuous glucose monitorings (CGMs) have been used to manage diabetes with reasonable glucose control amongst patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in recent decades. CGMs measure interstitial fluid glucose levels to provide information about glucose levels, which identify fluctuation that would not have been identified with conventional self-monitoring. Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is a classical tool to measure glycaemic changes. However, the effectiveness of glucose control, hypoglycemia, weight change, quality of life and user satisfaction, are needed to evaluate and compare CGMs and SMBG amongst adults with T2D. Methods: The review will compare the various forms of CGM systems (i.e flash CGM, real-time CGM, retrospective CGM) versus SMBG or usual intervention regarding diabetes management amongst adults with T2D. The following databases will be searched: Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus and grey literature (, PsycEXTRA, ProQuest Dissertations, Google Scholar and Theses Global) for the identification of studies. The studies involving adults (aged ≥ 18 years old) will be included. We will only include and summarise randomised clinical trials (RCTs) with respect to authors, publication type, year, status and type of devices. Studies published in English between February 2010 and March 2020, will be included as the field of CGMs amongst T2D patients has emerged over the last decade. Primary outcomes will be HbA1c (glycosylated haemoglobin level) (mmol/L), body weight (kg), time spent with hypoglycaemia (< 70 mg/dl) or hyperglycaemia (≥ 180 mg/dl), blood pressure (< 140/90 mmHg is considered as good management) and quality of life (understanding and feeling of living situation based on culture and value system). Secondary outcome measures will be user satisfaction (patient or treatment/intervention satisfaction or satisfaction scale) and barriers (physical and mental difficulties or issues). Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be conducted independently by at least two reviewers. A third reviewer will determine and resolve discrepancies. Moreover, the quality of the evidence of the review will be assessed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool (GRADE). Discussion: The review will synthesise evidence on the comparison between using CGMs and SMBG. The results will support researchers and health professionals to determine the most effective methods/technologies in the overall diabetes management.

Original languageEnglish
Article number120
JournalSystematic Reviews
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 31 May 2020
Externally publishedYes


  • Continuous glucose monitoring
  • Diabetes management
  • Health technology assessment
  • Self-monitoring of blood glucose
  • Systematic review
  • Type 2 diabetes


Dive into the research topics of 'Comparing effects of continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGMs) and self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) amongst adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review protocol'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this