Smart sensors vs. finger pricks: which works better for diabetes?

NCT ID NCT07595289

Not yet recruiting Disease control Sponsor: The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University Source: ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

First seen Jun 25, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026 · Updated 1 time

Summary

This study compares two glucose monitoring methods—continuous glucose monitors (CGM) and traditional finger-prick tests—in adults with type 2 diabetes who are taking the drug dapagliflozin. The 120 participants will be split into two groups and followed for 12 weeks to see which method leads to better blood sugar control. The trial also tests whether a digital platform can run most of the study remotely, reducing the need for hospital visits.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only — not medical advice or a prediction.

Active substance: dapagliflozin
What this could lead to: If successful, this could show that combining a common diabetes drug with continuous glucose monitoring helps more people reach their blood sugar targets than traditional finger-prick testing.
What could go wrong: This is a small, early-stage trial (120 people) testing feasibility as much as effectiveness. The results may not apply to all people with diabetes, and the technology platform may have reliability issues.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for TYPE 2 DIABETES MELLITUS are added.

Our safety recommendation!

By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use

Conditions

The condition(s) this trial relates to.

type 2 diabetes mellitus

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

TYPE 2 DIABETES MELLITUS (T2DM)

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.