ArticlePloS one2024
Deep learning for blood glucose level prediction: How well do models generalize across different data sets?
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep learning for blood glucose prediction: Reproducibility challenges and factors affecting differential performance.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Trustworthy AI for personalized glycemic control: a systematic review and critical appraisal of multimodal forecasting and safety-critical closed-loop control.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2026Review
- A personalized federated learning-based glucose prediction algorithm for high-risk glycemic excursion regions in type 1 diabetes.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Machine Learning-driven Identification of the Honeymoon Phase in Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes and Optimizing Insulin ManagementJournal of clinical research in pediatric endocrinology · 2025Article
- Noninvasive Continuous Glucose Monitoring Using Multimodal Near-Infrared, Temperature, and Pressure Signals on the Earlobe.Biosensors · 2025Article
- Evaluation of machine learning-based regression techniques for prediction of diabetes levels fluctuations.Heliyon · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Deep learning-based models for predicting blood glucose levels in diabetic patients can facilitate proactive measures to prevent critical events and are essential for closed-loop control therapy systems. However, selecting appropriate models from the literature may not always yield conclusive results, as the choice could be influenced by biases or misleading evaluations stemming from different methodologies, datasets, and preprocessing techniques. This study aims to compare and comprehensively analyze the performance of various deep learning models across diverse datasets to assess their applicability and generalizability across a broader spectrum of scenarios. Commonly used deep learning models for blood glucose level forecasting, such as feed-forward neural network, convolutional neural network, long short-term memory network (LSTM), temporal convolutional neural network, and self-attention network (SAN), are considered in this study. To evaluate the generalization capabilities of each model, four datasets of varying sizes, encompassing samples from different age groups and conditions, are utilized. Performance metrics include Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), Mean Absolute Difference (MAD), and Coefficient of Determination (CoD) for analytical asssessment, Clarke Error Grid (CEG) for clinical assessments, Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) test for statistical analysis, and generalization ability evaluations to obtain both coarse and granular insights. The experimental findings indicate that the LSTM model demonstrates superior performance with the lowest root mean square error and highest generalization capability among all other models, closely followed by SAN. The ability of LSTM and SAN to capture long-term dependencies in blood glucose data and their correlations with various influencing factors and events contribute to their enhanced performance. Despite the lower predictive performance, the FFN was able to capture patterns and trends in the data, suggesting its applicability in forecasting future direction. Moreover, this study helps in identifying the optimal model based on specific objectives, whether prioritizing generalization or accuracy.
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.