Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22538149›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2012

The identifiable virtual patient model: comparison of simulation and clinical closed-loop study results.

Sami S Kanderian, Stuart A Weinzimer, Garry M Steil

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Bolus Estimation--Rethinking the Effect of Meal Fat Content.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2015
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. A closed-loop microneedle-integrated physiological model for predictive glycemic management.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sami S KanderianYale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Stuart A Weinzimer
Garry M Steil

Funding

Closed-Loop Effectiveness and Ambulatory Regimens (CLEAR)R01DK085618 · NIDDK · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI WEINZIMER, STUART ALAN · 2009 to 2013
$3.5M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK085618NIDDK NIH HHS R01-DK64701
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOptimizing a closed-loop insulin delivery algorithm for individuals with type 1 diabetes can be potentially facilitated by a mathematical model of the patient. However, model simulation studies that evaluate changes to the control algorithm need to produce conclusions similar to those that would be obtained from a clinical study evaluating the same modification. We evaluated the ability of a low-order identifiable virtual patient (IVP) model to achieve this goal.

methodsTen adult subjects (42.5 ± 11.5 years of age; 18.0 ± 13.5 years diabetes; 6.9 ± 0.8% hemoglobin A1c) previously characterized with the IVP model were studied following the procedures independently reported in a pediatric study assessing proportional-integral-derivative control with and without a 50% meal insulin bolus. Peak postprandial glucose levels with and without the meal bolus and use of supplemental carbohydrate to treat hypoglycemia were compared using two-way analysis of variance and chi-square tests, respectively.

resultsThe meal bolus decreased the peak postprandial glucose levels in both the adult-simulation and pediatricclinical study (231 ± 38 standard deviation to 205 ± 33 mg/dl and 226 ± 51 to 194 ± 47 mg/dl, respectively; p = .0472). No differences were observed between the peak postprandial levels obtained in the two studies (clinical and simulation study not different, p = .57; interaction p = .83) or in the use of supplemental carbohydrate (3 occurrences in 17 patient days of closed-loop control in the clinical-pediatric study; 7 occurrences over 20 patient days in the adult-simulation study, p = .29).

conclusionsClosed-loop simulations using an IVP model can predict clinical study outcomes in patients studied independently from those used to develop the model.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsComputer SimulationInsulin Infusion SystemsModels, BiologicalPatient SimulationAdolescentAdultAnalysis of VarianceBiomarkersBlood GlucoseChi-Square DistributionDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Dietary CarbohydratesEatingFastingGlycated HemoglobinBiomarkersBlood GlucoseDietary CarbohydratesGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin

Identifiers

PMID22538149
PMCPMC3380781

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.