Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34490793›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2022

Incorporating Glucose Variability into Glucose Forecasting Accuracy Assessment Using the New Glucose Variability Impact Index and the Prediction Consistency Index: An LSTM Case Example.

Clara Mosquera-Lopez, Peter G Jacobs

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Clara Mosquera-LopezArtificial Intelligence for Medical Systems (AIMS) Lab, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1586-2490
Peter G JacobsArtificial Intelligence for Medical Systems (AIMS) Lab, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9897-4783
Oregon Health & Science University · US

Funding

Improving glucose control with advanced technology designed for high risk patients with type 1 diabetesR01DK120367 · NIDDK · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI JACOBS, PETER G, WILSON, LEAH MEGAN · 2018 to 2021
$2.4M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK120367
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn this work, we developed glucose forecasting algorithms trained and evaluated on a large dataset of free-living people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using closed-loop (CL) and sensor-augmented pump (SAP) therapies; and we demonstrate how glucose variability impacts accuracy. We introduce the glucose variability impact index (GVII) and the glucose prediction consistency index (GPCI) to assess the accuracy of prediction algorithms.

methodsA long-short-term-memory (LSTM) neural network was designed to predict glucose up to 60 minutes in the future using continuous glucose measurements and insulin data collected from 175 people with T1D (41,318 days) and evaluated on 75 people (11,333 days) from the Tidepool Big Data Donation Dataset. LSTM was compared with two naïve forecasting algorithms as well as Ridge linear regression and a random forest using root-mean-square error (RMSE). Parkes error grid quantified clinical accuracy. Regression analysis was used to derive the GVII and GPCI.

resultsThe LSTM had highest accuracy and best GVII and GPCI. RMSE for CL was 19.8 ± 3.2 and 33.2 ± 5.4 mg/dL for 30- and 60-minute prediction horizons, respectively. RMSE for SAP was 19.6 ± 3.8 and 33.1 ± 7.3 mg/dL for 30- and 60-minute prediction horizons, respectively; 99.6% and 97.6% of predictions were within zones A+B of the Parkes error grid at 30- and 60-minute prediction horizons, respectively. Glucose variability was strongly correlated with RMSE (R≥0.64,

conclusionsThe LSTM model was accurate on a large real-world free-living dataset. Glucose variability should be considered when assessing prediction accuracy using indices such as GVII and GPCI.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1GlucoseBlood GlucoseBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringForecastingHumansInsulin Infusion SystemsBlood GlucoseGlucoseglucose predictionglucose prediction consistency indexglucose variabilityglucose variability impact indexlong-short-term-memory neural networkType 1 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID34490793
PMCPMC8875041
OpenAlexW3198540913

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.