Personalized Type 1 Diabetes Management: Reinforcement Learning–Based Insulin Dosing and Glucose Forecasting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Optimizing insulin dosing and predicting future glucose levels for people with type 1 diabetes is challenging due to the dynamic nature of glucose metabolism. Traditional static insulin regimens fail to adapt to individual variability in diet, physical activity, stress, and metabolic fluctuations, leading to suboptimal glycemic control. Reinforcement learning (RL) offers a promising alternative by enabling personalized, real-time insulin adjustments that improve the balance between hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia. Objective: This study aims to develop a deep Q-network (DQN)-based RL system that dynamically personalizes insulin dosing recommendations using continuous glucose monitoring data, meal intake, and physical activity levels. By leveraging real-time data, the model adapts to patients' evolving physiological states, enhancing glucose control and patient safety. Methods: We used the OhioT1DM dataset (2018 and 2020), which includes 8 weeks of continuous glucose measurements, insulin dosing records, and physical activity data for twelve people with type 1 diabetes. The RL agent was designed with a state representation consisting of recent blood glucose levels, insulin doses, and lifestyle factors over a 2-hour window. The 2-hour window was selected based on the known pharmacodynamic profile of rapid-acting insulin (peak action within 90-120 min), as well as the typical lag in glycemic response following meals or exercise. This window size captures both recent and delayed physiological effects while balancing data density and model stability. The action space included discrete insulin dose recommendations (eg, 0.5 U, 1 U, and 1.5 U). A reward function incentivized glucose levels within the target range (70-180 mg/dL) while penalizing extreme deviations. The DQN model was trained to maximize reward by learning optimal dosing strategies through iterative trial and error. Results: Performance evaluation was conducted using both qualitative and quantitative metrics. Time-series analysis compared actual and predicted glucose levels, demonstrating effective glucose regulation. The RL model achieved a mean glucose level of 80.06 mg/dL, with a reward score of 10 during evaluation, indicating that most glucose predictions were maintained within the desired clinical range. This suggests the model has learned to regulate blood glucose effectively through adaptive insulin dosing. The root mean square error (12.39 mg/dL) was slightly higher than the mean absolute error (9.85 mg/dL), indicating stable predictions. Additionally, the percentage time in target range was 64.06%, suggesting that the model-maintained glucose within the clinically safe range for a majority of the time. Conclusions: The DQN-based RL model demonstrated its effectiveness in personalized insulin dosing while minimizing the risk of hypo- and hyperglycemia. This suggests the model has learned to regulate blood glucose effectively through adaptive insulin dosing. This approach represents a significant advancement over conventional methods, offering a scalable and adaptive strategy for real-world diabetes management, along with enhancing clinical trust and transparency through explainability techniques.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".