Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25285200›Full record

ReviewInterface focus2014

The mathematician's control toolbox for management of type 1 diabetes.

Marie Csete, John Doyle

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Interface focus, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Engineering control into medicine.Journal of critical care · 2015
    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

2 authors.

Marie CseteHuntington Medical Research Institutes , 99 N. El Molino Avenue, Pasadena, CA 91101 , USA.
John DoyleCalifornia Institute of Technology , 1200 E. California Boulevard, Pasadena, CA 91125 , USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Blood glucose levels are controlled by well-known physiological feedback loops: high glucose levels promote insulin release from the pancreas, which in turn stimulates cellular glucose uptake. Low blood glucose levels promote pancreatic glucagon release, stimulating glycogen breakdown to glucose in the liver. In healthy people, this control system is remarkably good at maintaining blood glucose in a tight range despite many perturbations to the system imposed by diet and fasting, exercise, medications and other stressors. Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) results from loss of the insulin-producing cells of the pancreas, the beta cells. These cells serve as both sensor (of glucose levels) and actuator (insulin/glucagon release) in a control physiological feedback loop. Although the idea of rebuilding this feedback loop seems intuitively easy, considerable control mathematics involving multiple types of control schema were necessary to develop an artificial pancreas that still does not function as well as evolved control mechanisms. Here, we highlight some tools from control engineering used to mimic normal glucose control in an artificial pancreas, and the constraints, trade-offs and clinical consequences inherent in various types of control schemes. T1DM can be viewed as a loss of normal physiologic controls, as can many other disease states. For this reason, we introduce basic concepts of control engineering applicable to understanding pathophysiology of disease and development of physiologically based control strategies for treatment.

Indexed as

control engineeringglucagonglucose homeostasisinsulinmodel predictive controltype 1 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID25285200
PMCPMC4142019

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.