Predicting Upcoming Glucose Levels in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Using a Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity Modelling Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Continuous blood glucose monitoring systems (CGMS) capture interstitial glucose levels at frequent intervals over time, and are used by people with diabetes and their health care professionals to assess glycaemic variability. This information helps to adjust treatment to achieve optimum glycaemic control, as well as potentially providing early warning of imminent and dangerous hypoglycaemia. Although a number of studies has reported the possibilities of predicting hypoglycaemia in insulin dependent type 1 diabetes (T1DM) patients, the prediction paradigm is still unreliable, as glucose fluctuations in people with diabetes are highly volatile and depend on many factors. Studies have proposed the use of linear auto-regressive (AR) and state space time series models to analyse the glucose profiles for predicting upcoming glucose levels. However, these modelling approaches have not adequately addressed the inherent dependencies and volatility aspects in the glucose profiles. We have investigated the utility of generalized autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity (GARCH) models to explore glucose time-series trends and volatility, and possibility of reliable short-term forecasting of glucose levels. GARCH models were explored using CGMS profiles of young children (4 to <10 years) with T1DM. The prediction performances of GARCH approach were compared with other contemporary modelling approaches such as lower and higher order AR, and the state space models. The GARCH approach appears to be successful in both realizing the volatility in glucose profiles and offering potentially more reliable forecasting of upcoming glucose levels.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".