Literature DB >> 19885133

Accuracy requirements for a hypoglycemia detector: an analytical model to evaluate the effects of bias, precision, and rate of glucose change.

Sharbel E Noujaim1, David Horwitz, Manoj Sharma, Joseph Marhoul.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There has been considerable debate on what constitutes a good hypoglycemia (Hypo) detector and what is the accuracy required from the continuous monitoring sensor to meet the requirements of such a detector. The performance of most continuous monitoring sensors today is characterized by the mean absolute relative difference (MARD), whereas Hypo detectors are characterized by the number of false positive and false negative alarms, which are more relevant to the performance of a Hypo detector. This article shows that the overall accuracy of the system and not just the sensor plays a key role.
METHODS: A mathematical model has been developed to investigate the relationship between the accuracy of the continuous monitoring system as described by the MARD, and the number of false negatives and false positives as a function of blood glucose rate change is established. A simulation method with N = 10,000 patients is used in developing the model and generating the results.
RESULTS: Based on simulation for different scenarios for rate of change (0.5, 1.0, and 5.0 mg/dl per minute), sampling rate (from 1, 2.5, 5, and 10 minutes), and MARD (5, 7.5, 10, 12.5, and 15%), the false positive and false negative ratios are computed. The following key results are from these computations. 1. For a given glucose rate of change, there is an optimum sampling time. 2. The optimum sampling time as defined in the critical sampling rate section gives the best combination of low false positives and low false negatives. 3. There is a strong correlation between MARD and false positives and false negatives. 4. For false positives of <10% and false negatives of <5%, a MARD of <7.5% is needed.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the model, assumptions in the model, and the simulation on N = 10,000 patients for different scenarios for rate of glucose change, sampling rate, and MARD, it is concluded that the false negative and false positive ratio will vary depending on the alarm Hypo threshold set by the patient and the MARD value. Also, to achieve a false negative ratio <5% and a false positive ratio <10% would require continuous glucose monitoring to have an MARD < or =7.5%.

Entities:  

Keywords:  accuracy; alarm threshold; bias; calibration; coefficient of variation; continuous glucose monitor; critical sampling rate; critical threshold; drift; false negative ratio; false positive ratio; glucose monitoring system; hypoglycemia; hypoglycemia detector; hypoglycemia threshold; lag effect; linear regression; mean absolute relative difference; precision; random variation; rate of glucose change; relative bias; sampling rate; sampling time; slope; standard normal random variable; systematic bias; target area; variable sampling rate

Year:  2007        PMID: 19885133      PMCID: PMC2769658          DOI: 10.1177/193229680700100509

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol        ISSN: 1932-2968


  7 in total

1.  Evaluating the accuracy of continuous glucose-monitoring sensors: continuous glucose-error grid analysis illustrated by TheraSense Freestyle Navigator data.

Authors:  Boris P Kovatchev; Linda A Gonder-Frederick; Daniel J Cox; William L Clarke
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 19.112

Review 2.  A review of continuous glucose monitoring technology.

Authors:  David C Klonoff
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 6.118

Review 3.  Performance standards for continuous glucose monitors.

Authors:  Paul G Hayter; Manoj Sharma; Lou Dunka; Phil Stout; David A Price; David L Horwitz; Joseph Marhoul; Shabnam Vaez-Zadeh
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 6.118

4.  Limitations of statistical measures of error in assessing the accuracy of continuous glucose sensors.

Authors:  Craig Kollman; Darrell M Wilson; Tim Wysocki; William V Tamborlane; Roy W Beck
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 6.118

5.  A critical appraisal of the continuous glucose-error grid analysis.

Authors:  Iris M Wentholt; Joost B Hoekstra; J Hans Devries
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 19.112

6.  Hypoglycemia prediction and detection using optimal estimation.

Authors:  Cesar C Palerm; John P Willis; James Desemone; B Wayne Bequette
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 6.118

7.  Alarms based on real-time sensor glucose values alert patients to hypo- and hyperglycemia: the guardian continuous monitoring system.

Authors:  Bruce Bode; Kenneth Gross; Nancy Rikalo; Sherwyn Schwartz; Timothy Wahl; Casey Page; Todd Gross; John Mastrototaro
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 6.118

  7 in total
  12 in total

1.  Continuous glucose monitoring: real-time algorithms for calibration, filtering, and alarms.

Authors:  B Wayne Bequette
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2010-03-01

2.  Benefits and Limitations of MARD as a Performance Parameter for Continuous Glucose Monitoring in the Interstitial Space.

Authors:  Lutz Heinemann; Michael Schoemaker; Günther Schmelzeisen-Redecker; Rolf Hinzmann; Adham Kassab; Guido Freckmann; Florian Reiterer; Luigi Del Re
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2019-06-19

3.  Model-Fusion-Based Online Glucose Concentration Predictions in People with Type 1 Diabetes.

Authors:  Xia Yu; Kamuran Turksoy; Mudassir Rashid; Jianyuan Feng; Nicole Frantz; Iman Hajizadeh; Sediqeh Samadi; Mert Sevil; Caterina Lazaro; Zacharie Maloney; Elizabeth Littlejohn; Laurie Quinn; Ali Cinar
Journal:  Control Eng Pract       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.475

4.  Glucose Monitoring in Individuals With Diabetes Using a Long-Term Implanted Sensor/Telemetry System and Model.

Authors:  Joseph Y Lucisano; Timothy L Routh; Joe T Lin; David A Gough
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2016-10-19       Impact factor: 4.538

5.  In a Free-Living Setting, Obesity Is Associated with Greater Food Intake in Response to a Similar Pre-Meal Glucose Nadir.

Authors:  Janice Kim; Wai Lam; Qinxin Wang; Lisa Parikh; Ahmed Elshafie; Elizabeth Sanchez-Rangel; Christian Schmidt; Fangyong Li; Janice Hwang; Renata Belfort-DeAguiar
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2019-05-14       Impact factor: 5.958

6.  Diabetes: Models, Signals, and Control.

Authors:  Claudio Cobelli; Chiara Dalla Man; Giovanni Sparacino; Lalo Magni; Giuseppe De Nicolao; Boris P Kovatchev
Journal:  IEEE Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2009-01-01

7.  Online Glucose Prediction Using Computationally Efficient Sparse Kernel Filtering Algorithms in Type-1 Diabetes.

Authors:  Xia Yu; Mudassir Rashid; Jianyuan Feng; Nicole Hobbs; Iman Hajizadeh; Sediqeh Samadi; Mert Sevil; Caterina Lazaro; Zacharie Maloney; Elizabeth Littlejohn; Laurie Quinn; Ali Cinar
Journal:  IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 5.485

Review 8.  Artificial pancreas: past, present, future.

Authors:  Claudio Cobelli; Eric Renard; Boris Kovatchev
Journal:  Diabetes       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 9.461

Review 9.  Diabetes technology: markers, monitoring, assessment, and control of blood glucose fluctuations in diabetes.

Authors:  Boris P Kovatchev
Journal:  Scientifica (Cairo)       Date:  2012-10-17

10.  Porous, Dexamethasone-loaded polyurethane coatings extend performance window of implantable glucose sensors in vivo.

Authors:  Suzana G Vallejo-Heligon; Nga L Brown; William M Reichert; Bruce Klitzman
Journal:  Acta Biomater       Date:  2015-10-29       Impact factor: 8.947

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.