You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 7, 2021. It is now read-only.
I was really happy to find this software and it works fine with my G4. Thanks for that!
However, I do not find any hint as to the correlation between EGV_DATA and actual mmol/l data. It looks similar, but there must be a factor and an offset involved in getting the mmol/l data. I suppose that EGV_DATA already have had the calibration in the device applied from the SENSOR_DATA? Then, when I read something like 79 in the latest EGV_DATA record it reads 4.4 mmol/l in the display. The time for the EGV_DATA record seems correct. Could you, or someone else, please clarify this to me, or point me to some reading I can do?
Best regards,
Morten Lind.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I guess that the EGV_DATA glucose is given in mg/dl. Ca anyone confirm this? And I find a correspondence of 80 mg/dl to 4.4 mmol/l in the manual of the Dexcom G4. Using the 4.4 / 80 factor in the EGV_DATA from the device seems to correspond well with the readings.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Hi compbrain,
I was really happy to find this software and it works fine with my G4. Thanks for that!
However, I do not find any hint as to the correlation between EGV_DATA and actual mmol/l data. It looks similar, but there must be a factor and an offset involved in getting the mmol/l data. I suppose that EGV_DATA already have had the calibration in the device applied from the SENSOR_DATA? Then, when I read something like 79 in the latest EGV_DATA record it reads 4.4 mmol/l in the display. The time for the EGV_DATA record seems correct. Could you, or someone else, please clarify this to me, or point me to some reading I can do?
Best regards,
Morten Lind.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: