Acceptability and satisfaction from CGM use
A significantly higher proportion of participants in the unblinded group agreed that it was relevant (93.3% vs 76.9%, p =0.005) and were motivated to track their daily behaviours (92.0% vs 75.6%,p =0.006), compared to participants in the blinded group (Table S3). Overall, the participants in the unblinded group had a higher user satisfaction score (4.4 + 0.7 vs 4.1 + 0.5,p =0.002) than the blinded group. However, the proportion of CGM users having at least 70% of the CGM data captured from the total wear-time was lower in the unblinded group, compared to the blinded group (32.1% vs 70.1%, p =0.002) (Table S3). Adverse events occurred in 29.3% from those in the unblinded group, and in 36.7% from the blinded group, with the most common adverse event being skin reactions at the site of sensor application (Table S4). Amongst the users in the unblinded group, >90% reported that they would scan their sensors at 4- or 8-hour intervals, and 36% reported that they never missed a scan. Approximately 56% were not motivated to change their lifestyle behaviours and 81.3% never correlated their meal intake with use of the sensor (Table S5).