BACKGROUND: In type 1 diabetes (T1D) management, short-term glucose prediction can allow to anticipate therapeutic decisions when hypo/hyperglycemia is imminent. Literature prediction methods mainly use past continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) readings. Sophisticated algorithms can use information on insulin delivered and meal carbohydrate (CHO) content. The quantification of how much insulin and CHO information improves glucose prediction is missing in the literature and is investigated, in an open-loop setting, in this proof-of-concept study. METHODS: We adopted a versatile literature prediction methodology able to utilize a variety of inputs. We compared predictors that use (1) CGM; (2) CGM and insulin; (3) CGM and CHO; and (4) CGM, insulin, and CHO. Data of 15 T1D subjects in open-loop setup were used. Prediction was evaluated via absolute error and temporal gain focusing on meal/night periods. The relative importance of each individual input of the predictor was evaluated with a sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: For a prediction horizon (PH) ≥ 30 minutes, insulin and CHO information improves prediction accuracy of 10% and double the temporal gain during the 2 hours following the meal. During the night the 4 methods did not give statistically different results. When PH ≥ 45 minutes, the influence of CHO information on prediction is 5-fold that of insulin. CONCLUSIONS: In an open-loop setting, with PH ≥ 30 minutes, information on CHO and insulin improves short-term glucose prediction in the 2-hour time window following a meal, but not during the night. CHO information improves prediction significantly more than insulin.
BACKGROUND: In type 1 diabetes (T1D) management, short-term glucose prediction can allow to anticipate therapeutic decisions when hypo/hyperglycemia is imminent. Literature prediction methods mainly use past continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) readings. Sophisticated algorithms can use information on insulin delivered and meal carbohydrate (CHO) content. The quantification of how much insulin and CHO information improves glucose prediction is missing in the literature and is investigated, in an open-loop setting, in this proof-of-concept study. METHODS: We adopted a versatile literature prediction methodology able to utilize a variety of inputs. We compared predictors that use (1) CGM; (2) CGM and insulin; (3) CGM and CHO; and (4) CGM, insulin, and CHO. Data of 15 T1D subjects in open-loop setup were used. Prediction was evaluated via absolute error and temporal gain focusing on meal/night periods. The relative importance of each individual input of the predictor was evaluated with a sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: For a prediction horizon (PH) ≥ 30 minutes, insulin and CHO information improves prediction accuracy of 10% and double the temporal gain during the 2 hours following the meal. During the night the 4 methods did not give statistically different results. When PH ≥ 45 minutes, the influence of CHO information on prediction is 5-fold that of insulin. CONCLUSIONS: In an open-loop setting, with PH ≥ 30 minutes, information on CHO and insulin improves short-term glucose prediction in the 2-hour time window following a meal, but not during the night. CHO information improves prediction significantly more than insulin.
Authors: Chiara Zecchin; Andrea Facchinetti; Giovanni Sparacino; Giuseppe De Nicolao; Claudio Cobelli Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2012-02-24 Impact factor: 4.538
Authors: Scott M Pappada; Brent D Cameron; Paul M Rosman; Raymond E Bourey; Thomas J Papadimos; William Olorunto; Marilyn J Borst Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: E I Georga; V C Protopappas; D Ardigo; M Marina; I Zavaroni; D Polyzos; D I Fotiadis Journal: IEEE J Biomed Health Inform Date: 2012-09-19 Impact factor: 5.772
Authors: Eleni I Georga; Vasilios C Protopappas; Demosthenes Polyzos; Dimitrios I Fotiadis Journal: Med Biol Eng Comput Date: 2015-03-15 Impact factor: 2.602
Authors: Bruce Buckingham; H Peter Chase; Eyal Dassau; Erin Cobry; Paula Clinton; Victoria Gage; Kimberly Caswell; John Wilkinson; Fraser Cameron; Hyunjin Lee; B Wayne Bequette; Francis J Doyle Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2010-03-03 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Adiwinata Gani; Andrei V Gribok; Srinivasan Rajaraman; W Kenneth Ward; Jaques Reifman Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2008-09-16 Impact factor: 4.538
Authors: Omar Diouri; Monika Cigler; Martina Vettoretti; Julia K Mader; Pratik Choudhary; Eric Renard Journal: Diabetes Metab Res Rev Date: 2021-03-24 Impact factor: 4.876