ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
Development and validation of a machine learning model for real-time blood glucose prediction for ICU patients.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Machine learning algorithms for predicting glycemic control and weight loss outcomes in GLP-1 receptor agonist users.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGlucose control of ICU patients is complicated due to various diseases, different patient characteristics, and divergent treatment received during ICU stay. To deal with this challenge, machine learning prediction models are emerging to forecast glucose-related events. Our study utilizing the machine learning algorithm to develop a real-time blood glucose (BG) prediction model, which aims to promote the precision insulin therapy.
methodsElectronic medical record data from a tertiary hospital were collected from September 2021 to September 2022. Demographics, comorbidities, vital signs, laboratory results, previous BG measurements, records of insulin injection, nutritional intake, and vasoactive inotropic score (VIS) were included as candidate predictor variables. Four machine learning algorithms including elastic net linear regression, random forest, eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), and support vector regression were employed to develop prediction model. Internal validation was performed to select final model, and then was externally validated using MIMIC-IV database. Performance metrics included root mean square error (RMSE), mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), mean absolute deviation (MAD), and Clarke error grid analysis (CEGA). Finally, subgroup analysis detected predictive performance’s heterogeneity, while Shapley additive explanation (SHAP) method enhanced the clinical interpretability.
resultsTotal of 3,385 ICU patients with 58,090 BG measurements were included, with 80% for training and 20% for validation. XGBoost performed best in internal validation and was selected as final model (RMSE = 33.59mg/dL, MAPE = 15.39%, MAD = 23.92mg/dL, proportion of type A predictions = 75.67%, and proportion of clinically inappropriate predictions = 0.29%). XGBoost model also showed satisfactory performance in external validation of MIMIC-IV database, underscoring robustness and generalizability. Finally, SHAP method elucidated predictors’ contributions to the predictions from both global and individual perspectives.
conclusionsOur study proposes a real-time blood glucose prediction model utilizing the XGBoost machine learning framework in real-world ICU scenarios. The model could facilitate clinicians in understanding the real-time trend of patients’ glucose level and making timely therapeutic decisions. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.