ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2017
An Enhanced Model Predictive Control for the Artificial Pancreas Using a Confidence Index Based on Residual Analysis of Past Predictions.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- On the road to fully automated insulin delivery: A systematic review of meal announcement free algorithms.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Glucose Rate-of-Change and Insulin-on-Board Jointly Weighted Zone Model Predictive Control.IEEE transactions on control systems technology : a publication of the IEEE Control Systems Society · 2023Article
- GLYFE: review and benchmark of personalized glucose predictive models in type 1 diabetes.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2022Review
- Zone-MPC Automated Insulin Delivery Algorithm Tuned for Pregnancy Complicated by Type 1 Diabetes.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2021Article
- Constructing a control-ready model of EEG signal during general anesthesia in humans.IFAC-PapersOnLine · 2020Article
- Controlling the AP Controller: Controller Performance Assessment and Modification.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2019Article
- Adaptive Control of an Artificial Pancreas Using Model Identification, Adaptive Postprandial Insulin Delivery, and Heart Rate and Accelerometry as Control Inputs.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2019Article
- Closed-Loop Control with Unannounced Exercise for Adults with Type 1 Diabetes using the Ensemble Model Predictive Control.Journal of process control · 2019Article
- Design of an online-tuned model based compound controller for a fully automated artificial pancreas.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2019Article
- Adaptive Zone Model Predictive Control of Artificial Pancreas Based on Glucose- and Velocity-Dependent Control Penalties.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2019Article
- Evaluation of an Artificial Pancreas with Enhanced Model Predictive Control and a Glucose Prediction Trust Index with Unannounced Exercise.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2018Article
- Velocity-weighting & velocity-penalty MPC of an artificial pancreas: Improved safety & performance.Automatica : the journal of IFAC, the International Federation of Automatic Control · 2018Article
- A Hybrid Dynamic Wavelet-Based Modeling Method for Blood Glucose Concentration Prediction in Type 1 Diabetes.Journal of medical signals and sensorsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundModel predictive control (MPC) performance depends on the accuracy of the prediction model implemented by the controller. Complex physiology and modeling limitations often prevent the ability to provide long and accurate glucose predictions, which results in the need to account for prediction errors.
methodOptimal insulin dosage by Zone-MPC is calculated by solving an optimization problem in which a scalar index is minimized by penalizing relative input deviations and glucose predictions out of the reference zone. The controller's tuning parameters are the penalties on the input variable (insulin). Positive and negative relative inputs are penalized differently. A dynamic adaptation of the tuning parameters based on the accuracy of the model in recent history is implemented in this article and compared in silico to aggressive and conservative tunings of the same controller structure.
resultsSimilar average glucose and time in the safe glucose range (70-180 mg/dL) are achieved for the adaptive design and traditional controller configurations. However, percentage time under 70 mg/dL is significantly reduced, both for announced meals using bolus compensation and unannounced meals with a meal detection algorithm triggered bolus. No differences in the average insulin delivered were observed between the adaptive design and the conservative or aggressive tuning for the bolus strategy, and the adaptive controller delivered less insulin in the other scenario considered.
conclusionsThe adaptive strategy provides safe and effective glucose management as well as significant reduction of hypoglycemia events. No abnormal insulin delivery profiles were observed upon the application of the adaptive strategy.
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.