MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405870068 · doi:10.2196/68914

Web-Based, Algorithm-Guided Insulin Titration in Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes: Pre-Post Intervention Study

2024· article· en· W4405870068 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nishanth Thiagarajan, Hong Chang Tan, Suresh Chandran, Phong Ching Lee, Yun Ann Chin, Wanling Zeng, Emily Tse Lin Ho, David Carmody, Su-Yen Goh, Yong Mong Bee

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintInsulinType 2 diabetesThe InternetComputer scienceAlgorithmTitrationMedicineDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyChemistryWorld Wide WebInorganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) using web-based diabetes management platforms has demonstrated promise in managing type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, the effectiveness of such systems incorporating algorithm-guided insulin titration has not been extensively studied in Asian populations. Objective: This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of the ALRT telehealth solution-a US Food and Drug Administration-cleared, web-based platform that integrates SMBG with algorithm-driven insulin dose adjustments-in improving glycemia in insulin-treated T2D. Methods: This 24-week, pre-post intervention study enrolled 25 adults with T2D (mean age 58.9, SD 7.0 y; n=14, 56% male) on twice-daily premixed insulin. Inclusion criteria included a baseline hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level between 7.5% to 9.9% (58-86 mmol/mol), a BMI ≤40 kg/m², and experience with SMBG. Participants uploaded twice-daily SMBG data weekly via a mobile app, which generated insulin titration recommendations based on a predefined algorithm. Physicians reviewed and approved the recommendations, which were then communicated back to participants via the app. The primary outcome was the change in HbA1c level from baseline to 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes included changes in fasting plasma glucose, insulin dose, hypoglycemia incidence, and SMBG adherence. Results: Participants achieved significant reductions in HbA1c level from 8.6% (70 mmol/mol) at baseline to 7.4% (57 mmol/mol) at 24 weeks (P<.001), with reductions of 0.8% and 0.4% in the first and second 12 weeks, respectively. Fasting plasma glucose decreased from 8.7 (SD 2.0) mmol/L to 7.1 (SD 1.4) mmol/L (P<.001). Mean total daily insulin dose increased modestly from 0.73 (SD 0.31) units/kg/day to 0.79 (SD 0.34) units/kg/day (P=.007). Participants demonstrated high adherence, completing 97.3% (327/336) of prescribed SMBG measurements. During the study, 48% (12/25) of participants experienced at least 1 hypoglycemia episode, predominantly mild hypoglycemia (85/96, 88.5%; glucose 3.0-3.9 mmol/L). Hypoglycemia episodes increased from 24 during weeks 0-12 to 72 during weeks 13-24. There were no episodes of severe hypoglycemia requiring external assistance. BMI increased slightly from 29.0 (SD 3.6) kg/m² to 29.5 (SD 3.6) kg/m² (P=.03), reflecting a modest weight gain associated with improved glycemia. Conclusions: In conclusion, patients with insulin-treated T2D initiated on a web-based glucose monitoring system with algorithm-guided dosing recommendations showed significant improvement in glycemic control compared to baseline. High adherence rates underscore the feasibility of integrating algorithm-guided insulin titration into routine care. While hypoglycemia incidence rose slightly, episodes were predominantly mild, and no severe events occurred. This intervention shows promise for broader adoption in T2D management, particularly in resource-constrained settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicDiabetes Management and Research→French-language works237,207→