ArticleDiabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association2016
The artificial pancreas: evaluating risk of hypoglycaemia following errors that can be expected with prolonged at-home use.
Article in Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stakeholder Perspectives on the Integration of AI in Diabetes Care: Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Themes, Rates, and Risk of Adverse Events of the Artificial Pancreas in the United States Using MAUDE.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2024Article
- Article
- The challenges of achieving postprandial glucose control using closed-loop systems in patients with type 1 diabetes.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2018Review
- Artificial Pancreas Device Systems for the Closed-Loop Control of Type 1 Diabetes: What Systems Are in Development?Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2016Review
- The artificial pancreas: evaluating risk of hypoglycaemia following errors that can be expected with prolonged at-home use.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsArtificial pancreas systems show benefit in closely monitored at-home studies, but may not have sufficient power to assess safety during infrequent, but expected, system or user errors. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of an artificial pancreas system emulating the β-cell when the glucose value used for control is improperly calibrated and participants forget to administer pre-meal insulin boluses.
methodsArtificial pancreas control was performed in a clinic research centre on three separate occasions each lasting from 10 p.m. to 2 p.m. Sensor glucose values normally used for artificial pancreas control were replaced with scaled blood glucose values calculated to be 20% lower than, equal to or 33% higher than the true blood glucose. Safe control was defined as blood glucose between 3.9 and 8.3 mmol/l.
resultsArtificial pancreas control resulted in fasting scaled blood glucose values not different from target (6.67 mmol/l) at any scaling factor. Meal control with scaled blood glucose 33% higher than blood glucose resulted in supplemental carbohydrate to prevent hypoglycaemia in four of six participants during breakfast, and one participant during the night. In all instances, scaled blood glucose reported blood glucose as safe.
conclusionsOutpatient trials evaluating artificial pancreas performance based on sensor glucose may not detect hypoglycaemia when sensor glucose reads higher than blood glucose. Because these errors are expected to occur, in-hospital artificial pancreas studies using supplemental carbohydrate in anticipation of hypoglycaemia, which allow safety to be assessed in a controlled non-significant environment should be considered as an alternative. Inpatient studies provide a definitive alternative to model-based computer simulations and can be conducted in parallel with closely monitored outpatient artificial pancreas studies used to assess benefit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.