Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37543512›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Digital health2023

Integrating metabolic expenditure information from wearable fitness sensors into an AI-augmented automated insulin delivery system: a randomised clinical trial.

Peter G Jacobs, Navid Resalat, Wade Hilts, Gavin M Young, Joseph Leitschuh, Joseph Pinsonault, Joseph El Youssef, Deborah Branigan, Virginia Gabo, Jae Eom and 5 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Digital health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04771403 (A Randomized, Two-way, Cross-over Study to Assess the Efficacy of an MPC Exercise-enabled Closed-loop System vs FMPD Exercise-enabled Closed-loop System), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04771403 nacompletednot on this map

A Randomized, Two-way, Cross-over Study to Assess the Efficacy of an MPC Exercise-enabled Closed-loop System vs FMPD Exercise-enabled Closed-loop System

TypeinterventionalSponsorOregon Health and Science UniversityRan2021 to 2022Enrolled25ConditionsType 1 DiabetesArmsFMPD AP algorithm, MPC AP system, Dexcom G6 Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) System
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Materials and System Design for Self-Decision Bioelectronic Systems.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Artificial Intelligence in Diabetes Care: Applications, Challenges, and Opportunities Ahead.Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists · 2025
    Review
  14. Article
  15. The Future of Automated Insulin Delivery Systems.Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists · 2025
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Peter G JacobsArtificial Intelligence for Medical Systems Lab, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Center for Health and Healing, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA. Electronic address: jacobsp@ohsu.edu.
Navid ResalatArtificial Intelligence for Medical Systems Lab, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Center for Health and Healing, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Wade HiltsArtificial Intelligence for Medical Systems Lab, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Center for Health and Healing, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Gavin M YoungArtificial Intelligence for Medical Systems Lab, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Center for Health and Healing, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Joseph LeitschuhArtificial Intelligence for Medical Systems Lab, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Center for Health and Healing, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Joseph PinsonaultArtificial Intelligence for Medical Systems Lab, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Center for Health and Healing, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Joseph El YoussefHarold Schnitzer Diabetes Health Center, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Deborah BraniganHarold Schnitzer Diabetes Health Center, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Virginia GaboHarold Schnitzer Diabetes Health Center, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Jae EomHarold Schnitzer Diabetes Health Center, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Katrina RamseyOregon Clinical and Translational Research Institute Biostatistics and Design Program, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Robert DodierArtificial Intelligence for Medical Systems Lab, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Center for Health and Healing, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Clara Mosquera-LopezArtificial Intelligence for Medical Systems Lab, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Center for Health and Healing, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Leah M WilsonHarold Schnitzer Diabetes Health Center, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Jessica R CastleHarold Schnitzer Diabetes Health Center, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.

Funding

Oregon Clinical and Translational Research Institute - The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C)UL1TR002369 · NCATS · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI Cynthia D Morris, Christopher G. Slatore · 2017 to 2026
$78.4M
Improving Glycemic Management in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Using a Context-aware Automated Insulin Delivery SystemR01DK122583 · NIDDK · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI JACOBS, PETER G, WILSON, LEAH MEGAN · 2019 to 2022
$2.4M
Improving glucose control with advanced technology designed for high risk patients with type 1 diabetesR01DK120367 · NIDDK · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI JACOBS, PETER G, WILSON, LEAH MEGAN · 2018 to 2021
$2.4M
Leveraging Big Data and Deep Learning to Develop Next Generation Decision Support Tools to Improve Glycemic Outcomes in Type 1 DiabetesF30DK128914 · NIDDK · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI YOUNG, GAVIN · 2021 to 2024
$209k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002369NIDDK NIH HHS F30 DK128914NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK120367NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK122583
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExercise can rapidly drop glucose in people with type 1 diabetes. Ubiquitous wearable fitness sensors are not integrated into automated insulin delivery (AID) systems. We hypothesised that an AID can automate insulin adjustments using real-time wearable fitness data to reduce hypoglycaemia during exercise and free-living conditions compared with an AID not automating use of fitness data.

methodsOur study population comprised of individuals (aged 21-50 years) with type 1 diabetes from from the Harold Schnitzer Diabetes Health Center clinic at Oregon Health and Science University, OR, USA, who were enrolled into a 76 h single-centre, two-arm randomised (4-block randomisation), non-blinded crossover study to use (1) an AID that detects exercise, prompts the user, and shuts off insulin during exercise using an exercise-aware adaptive proportional derivative (exAPD) algorithm or (2) an AID that automates insulin adjustments using fitness data in real-time through an exercise-aware model predictive control (exMPC) algorithm. Both algorithms ran on iPancreas comprising commercial glucose sensors, insulin pumps, and smartwatches. Participants executed 1 week run-in on usual therapy followed by exAPD or exMPC for one 12 h primary in-clinic session involving meals, exercise, and activities of daily living, and 2 free-living out-patient days. Primary outcome was time below range (<3·9 mmol/L) during the primary in-clinic session. Secondary outcome measures included mean glucose and time in range (3·9-10 mmol/L). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04771403.

findingsBetween April 13, 2021, and Oct 3, 2022, 27 participants (18 females) were enrolled into the study. There was no significant difference between exMPC (n=24) versus exAPD (n=22) in time below range (mean [SD] 1·3% [2·9] vs 2·5% [7·0]) or time in range (63·2% [23·9] vs 59·4% [23·1]) during the primary in-clinic session. In the 2 h period after start of in-clinic exercise, exMPC had significantly lower mean glucose (7·3 [1·6] vs 8·0 [1·7] mmol/L, p=0·023) and comparable time below range (1·4% [4·2] vs 4·9% [14·4]). Across the 76 h study, both algorithms achieved clinical time in range targets (71·2% [16] and 75·5% [11]) and time below range (1·0% [1·2] and 1·3% [2·2]), significantly lower than run-in period (2·4% [2·4], p=0·0004 vs exMPC; p=0·012 vs exAPD). No adverse events occurred.

interpretationAIDs can integrate exercise data from smartwatches to inform insulin dosing and limit hypoglycaemia while improving glucose outcomes. Future AID systems that integrate exercise metrics from wearable fitness sensors may help people living with type 1 diabetes exercise safely by limiting hypoglycaemia.

fundingJDRF Foundation and the Leona M and Harry B Helmsley Charitable Trust, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1HypoglycemiaWearable Electronic DevicesActivities of Daily LivingArtificial IntelligenceCross-Over StudiesFemaleGlucoseHealth ExpendituresHumansHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinMaleUnited StatesGlucoseHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin

Identifiers

PMID37543512
PMCPMC10557965

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.