ArticlePloS one2019
A statistical virtual patient population for the glucoregulatory system in type 1 diabetes with integrated exercise model.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 78 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating metabolic expenditure information from wearable fitness sensors into an AI-augmented automated insulin delivery system: a randomised clinical trial.The Lancet. Digital health · 2023Trial
- Data, Process, and Data-Driven Representations of Digital Twins in Diabetes: Scoping Review.JMIR diabetes · 2026Review
- Metabolic Responses to Exercise and Nutritional Strategies in Type 1 Diabetes Using Automated Insulin Delivery Systems: A Narrative Review.Metabolites · 2026Review
- Identifying and Intervening on Glucose Patterns in Multivariate Data Using Block-Based Recurrence Quantification Analysis.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2025Article
- Metabolic Models, in Silico Trials, and Algorithms.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2025Review
- Metabolic Models, in Silico Trials, and Algorithms.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2025Review
- Digital twins in healthcare: a comprehensive review and future directions.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
- Validation of the UVA Simulation Replay Methodology Using Clinical Data: Reproducing a Randomized Clinical Trial.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2024Article
- Envisioning the Future of Personalized Medicine: Role and Realities of Digital Twins.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Design andJournal of diabetes science and technology · 2024Article
- NIH Fifth Artificial Pancreas Workshop 2023: Meeting Report: The Fifth Artificial Pancreas Workshop: Enabling Fully Automation, Access, and Adoption.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2024Article
- Combining uncertainty-aware predictive modeling and a bedtime Smart Snack intervention to prevent nocturnal hypoglycemia in people with type 1 diabetes on multiple daily injections.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Article
- Quantifying insulin-mediated and noninsulin-mediated changes in glucose dynamics during resistance exercise in type 1 diabetes.American journal of physiology. Endocrinology and metabolism · 2023Article
- Enabling fully automated insulin delivery through meal detection and size estimation using Artificial Intelligence.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Article
- New model of glucose-insulin regulation characterizes effects of physical activity and facilitates personalized treatment evaluation in children and adults with type 1 diabetes.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- A metamodel-based flexible insulin therapy for type 1 diabetes patients subjected to aerobic physical activity.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Integrating Multiple Inputs Into an Artificial Pancreas System: Narrative Literature Review.JMIR diabetes · 2022Review
- Dynamic of Glucose Homeostasis in Virtual Patients: A Comparison between Different Behaviors.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Evaluation of blood glucose level control in type 1 diabetic patients using deep reinforcement learning.PloS one · 2022Article
- Prior Informed Regularization of Recursively Updated Latent-Variables-Based Models with Missing Observations.Control engineering practice · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe introduce two validated single (SH) and dual hormone (DH) mathematical models that represent an in-silico virtual patient population (VPP) for type 1 diabetes (T1D). The VPP can be used to evaluate automated insulin and glucagon delivery algorithms, so-called artificial pancreas (AP) algorithms that are currently being used to help people with T1D better manage their glucose levels. We present validation results comparing these virtual patients with true clinical patients undergoing AP control and demonstrate that the virtual patients behave similarly to people with T1D.
methodsA single hormone virtual patient population (SH-VPP) was created that is comprised of eight differential equations that describe insulin kinetics, insulin dynamics and carbohydrate absorption. The parameters in this model that represent insulin sensitivity were statistically sampled from a normal distribution to create a population of virtual patients with different levels of insulin sensitivity. A dual hormone virtual patient population (DH-VPP) extended this SH-VPP by incorporating additional equations to represent glucagon kinetics and glucagon dynamics. The DH-VPP is comprised of thirteen differential equations and a parameter representing glucagon sensitivity, which was statistically sampled from a normal distribution to create virtual patients with different levels of glucagon sensitivity. We evaluated the SH-VPP and DH-VPP on a clinical data set of 20 people with T1D who participated in a 3.5-day outpatient AP study. Twenty virtual patients were matched with the 20 clinical patients by total daily insulin requirements and body weight. The identical meals given during the AP study were given to the virtual patients and the identical AP control algorithm that was used to control the glucose of the virtual patients was used on the clinical patients. We compared percent time in target range (70-180 mg/dL), time in hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) and time in hyperglycemia (>180 mg/dL) for both the virtual patients and the actual patients.
resultsThe subjects in the SH-VPP performed similarly vs. the actual patients (time in range: 78.1 ± 5.1% vs. 74.3 ± 8.1%, p = 0.11; time in hypoglycemia: 3.4 ± 1.3% vs. 2.8 ± 1.7%, p = 0.23). The subjects in the DH-VPP also performed similarly vs. the actual patients (time in range: 75.6 ± 5.5% vs. 71.9 ± 10.9%, p = 0.13; time in hypoglycemia: 0.9 ± 0.8% vs. 1.3 ± 1%, p = 0.19). While the VPPs tended to over-estimate the time in range relative to actual patients, the difference was not statistically significant.
conclusionsWe have verified that a SH-VPP and a DH-VPP performed comparably with actual patients undergoing AP control using an identical control algorithm. The SH-VPP and DH-VPP may be used as a simulator for pre-evaluation of T1D control algorithms.
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.