Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23294787›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2012

Use of a food and drug administration-approved type 1 diabetes mellitus simulator to evaluate and optimize a proportional-integral-derivative controller.

Srinivas Laxminarayan, Jaques Reifman, Garry M Steil

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Recent advances in the precision control strategy of artificial pancreas.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2024
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Srinivas LaxminarayanDoD Biotechnology High-Performance Computing Software Applications Institute, Telemedicine and Advanced Technology Research Center, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, Fort Detrick, MD 21702, USA.
Jaques Reifman
Garry M Steil
Boston Children's Museum · USUnited States Army Medical Research and Development Command · USUnited States Department of the Army · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical studies have shown that the Medtronic proportional-integral-derivative (PID) control with insulin feedback (IFB) provides stable 24 h glucose control, but with high postprandial glucose. We coupled this algorithm to a Food and Drug Administration-approved type 1 diabetes mellitus simulator to determine whether a proportional-derivative controller with preprogrammed basal rates (PDBASAL) would have better performance.

methodsWe performed simulation studies on 10 adult subjects to (1) obtain the basal profiles for the PDBASAL controller; (2) define the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile used to effect IFB, (3) optimize the PID and PDBASAL control parameters, (4) evaluate improvements obtained with IFB, and (5) develop a method to simulate changes in insulin sensitivity and assess the ability of each algorithm to respond to such changes.

resultsPDBASAL control significantly reduced peak postprandial glucose [252 (standard error = 11) versus 279 (14) mg/dl; p < .001] and increased nadir glucose [102 (3) versus 92 (3) mg/dl; p < .001] compared with PID control (both implemented with IFB). However, with PDBASAL control, fasting glucose remained elevated following a 30% decrease in insulin sensitivity [156 (6) mg/dl; different from the target of 110 mg/dl; p < .001] and remained below target following a 30% increase in insulin sensitivity [84 (2) mg/dl; p < .001]. In both cases, PID control returned glucose levels to target.

conclusionsPDBASAL provides better postprandial glucose control than PID but is not appropriate for subjects whose basal requirements change with insulin sensitivity. Simulations used to compare different control strategies should assess this variability.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsComputer SimulationAdultAgedBlood GlucoseDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1HumansInsulin Infusion SystemsMiddle AgedPostprandial PeriodUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationYoung AdultBlood Glucose

Identifiers

PMID23294787
PMCPMC3570882
OpenAlexW2027454473

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.