A Randomized Crossover Pilot Study Evaluating Glucose Control During Exercise Initiated 1 or 2 h After a Meal in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Treated with an Automated Insulin Delivery System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: To assess the safety and efficacy of two exercise sessions performed 60- and 120-min postmeal with a combination of meal bolus reduction and increased glucose target to the automated insulin delivery (AID) system. Methods: A randomized crossover trial in 13 adult participants (6 females) living with type 1 diabetes using AID (A1c = 7.9% ± 0.6%, age = 53.5 ± 15.5 years, T1D duration = 29.0 ± 16.0 years) was conducted. Just before breakfast, at the time of meal bolus, the AID glucose target was increased from 6 to 9 mmol/L, and a meal bolus reduction of 33% was applied. Two 60-min exercise sessions (60% of VO 2 peak) were undertaken either 60 min (60EX) or 120 min (120EX) after a standardized breakfast, followed by a 90-min recovery period. Results: The mean reduction in plasma glucose (PG) levels from prebreakfast to postexercise (−0.8 ± 2.4 mmol/L vs. +0.3 ± 2.3 mmol/L, P = 0.082) were similar between 60EX and 120EX. From prebreakfast to postexercise, PG times in range (3.9–10.0 mmol/L; 63.4% ± 43.1% 60EX vs. 51.9% ± 29.7% 120EX, P = 0.219) and time above range (>10.0 mmol/L; 36.3% ± 43.3% 60EX vs. 48.1% ± 29.7% 120EX, P = 0.211) did not differ between interventions. The 60EX attenuated the glucose rise between premeal to pre-exercise (+1.8 ± 2.1 mmol/L 60EX vs. +3.9 ± 2.1 mmol/L 120EX, P = 0.001). No hypoglycemic events (<3.9 mmol/L) occurred during the study. Conclusion: Premeal announcement combining meal bolus reduction and increased glucose target was effective and safe during 60 min of moderate-intensity aerobic exercise, whether exercise onset was 60 or 120 min following a meal. Clinical Trial Registration No.: NCT04031599.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".