MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3086044206 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2020.3023555

A Model-Based Insulin Dose Optimization Algorithm for People With Type 1 Diabetes on Multiple Daily Injections Therapy

2020· article· en· W3086044206 on OpenAlexafffund
Anas El Fathi, Robert E. Kearney, Emilie Palisaitis, Benoît Boulet, Ahmad Haidar

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsType 2 diabetesInsulinDiabetes mellitusMedicineAlgorithmType 1 diabetesComputer scienceType (biology)EndocrinologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Multiple daily injections (MDI) therapy is the most common treatment for type 1 diabetes (T1D) including basal insulin doses to keep glucose levels constant during fasting conditions and bolus insulin doses with meals. Optimal insulin dosing is critical to achieving satisfactory glycemia but is challenging due to inter- and intra-individual variability. Here, we present a novel model-based iterative algorithm that optimizes insulin doses using previous-day glucose, insulin, and meal data. METHODS: Our algorithm employs a maximum-a-posteriori method to estimate parameters of a model describing the effects of changes in basal-bolus insulin doses. Then, parameter estimates, their confidence intervals, and the goodness of fit, are combined to generate new recommendations. We assessed our algorithm in three ways. First, a clinical data set of 150 days (15 participants) were used to evaluate the proposed model and the estimation method. Second, 60-day simulations were performed to demonstrate the efficacy of the algorithm. Third, a sample 6-day clinical experiment is presented and discussed. RESULTS: The model fitted the clinical data well with a root-mean-square-error of 1.75 mmol/L. Simulation results showed an improvement in the time in target (3.9-10 mmol/L) from 64% to 77% and a decrease in the time in hypoglycemia (< 3.9 mmol/L) from 8.1% to 3.8%. The clinical experiment demonstrated the feasibility of the algorithm. CONCLUSION: Our algorithm has the potential to improve glycemic control in people with T1D using MDI. SIGNIFICANCE: This work is a step forward towards a decision support system that improves their quality of life.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207