Given that I've visited the doctor's office once with most of my suite of meters, and several times with the Flash, a few sets of results are in order. Please remember that these are single spot readings, and I'm dealing with only ONE instance of each meter in question. Members of this community have posted issues regarding individual meters of a particular brand and model, with the same models being touted and panned by different users.
The readings from my most recent doctor's visit: lab comparison to meters. The lab results show an earlier time than the first group of meter checks, even though the checks were performed immediately after the draw. There was a bit of an interruption before the second group. The two One Touch tests were from the same vial of strips; I couldn't test the UltraMini because I'd not realized I only had 2 One Touch strips with me.
Based on this single spot reading, one might consider the One Touch monitors to be the more accurate read. However, these are single readings. The only meter for which I have a history of comparison readings is the Flash, which I've had for about five years. For comparison, I present the most recent readings from the doctor's lab against my Flash:
Over the almost five years I've had the Flash, the difference between it and lab results has never been more than 5 or 6 points, regardless of whether or not it is a fasting reading. Most of the readings have been within one or two points, the Flash being slightly lower than the lab. This suggests that over time, both the Flash and the One Touch monitors should be equally accurate in the range around 100 mg/dl. Since I rarely spike over 160 (and usually consider a 2-hour postprandial over 110 as a "spike") and I rarely dip below 80, it is harder for me to test the accuracy of these meters in the upper and lower registers so important to a T1.