{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.038403614457831324, 'fraction_numerical': 0.043674698795180725, 'mean_word_length': 4.67948717948718, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluation of the Three Glucometer Devices Performance in Comparison with the Cobas Integra 400 Plus Autoanalyzer in Measuring Blood Glucose Levels: A Comparative Cross-Sectional Study

Objective: The study aimed to evaluate the performance of the three glucometers compared to standard the laboratory method (Cobas Integra 400 Plus) in measuring blood glucose levels. Patients and Methods: A total of 100 Yemeni diabetic patients were randomly recruited into a comparative cross-sectional study. Venous and finger-pricked blood samples were obtained from all participants and used for blood glucose levels measurement following the standard procedures. Results: The mean blood glucose levels for one-hundred diabetic patients using the Gluco Contour TS and Gluco SD Codefree were not significantly different compared with the Cobas Integra 400 Plus (12.14 ± 6.89 mmol/L vs. 12.85 ± 8.83 mmol/L, P = 0.159; 12.50 ± 7.18 mmol/L vs. 12.85 ± 8.83 mmol/L, P = 0.490), respectively. However, there is a significant difference using the Gluco Alert device from that of the Cobas Integra 400 Plus (11.83 ± 6.94 thods was good, with high sensitivity and specificity in measuring blood glucose levels as indicated by the ROC curve. Thus, we suggest using these glucometers at homes and hospitals as a point of care for diabetic patients.