Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39561353›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024

AI-Based Noninvasive Blood Glucose Monitoring: Scoping Review.

Pin Zhong Chan, Eric Jin, Miia Jansson, Han Shi Jocelyn Chew

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Recent Advances in AI and GenAI for Health Informatics.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Pin Zhong ChanDepartment of Nursing, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-8925-137X
Eric JinYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0009-0003-5360-7658
Miia JanssonResearch Unit of Health Sciences and Technology, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-5815-0325
Han Shi Jocelyn ChewAlice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-4209-1647

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent blood glucose monitoring (BGM) methods are often invasive and require repetitive pricking of a finger to obtain blood samples, predisposing individuals to pain, discomfort, and infection. Noninvasive blood glucose monitoring (NIBGM) is ideal for minimizing discomfort, reducing the risk of infection, and increasing convenience.

objectiveThis review aimed to map the use cases of artificial intelligence (AI) in NIBGM.

methodsA systematic scoping review was conducted according to the Arksey O'Malley five-step framework. Eight electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, The Cochrane-Central Library, ACM Digital Library, and IEEE Xplore) were searched from inception until February 8, 2023. Study selection was conducted by 2 independent reviewers, descriptive analysis was conducted, and findings were presented narratively. Study characteristics (author, country, type of publication, study design, population characteristics, mean age, types of noninvasive techniques used, and application, as well as characteristics of the BGM systems) were extracted independently and cross-checked by 2 investigators. Methodological quality appraisal was conducted using the Checklist for assessment of medical AI.

resultsA total of 33 papers were included, representing studies from Asia, the United States, Europe, the Middle East, and Africa published between 2005 and 2023. Most studies used optical techniques (n=19, 58%) to estimate blood glucose levels (n=27, 82%). Others used electrochemical sensors (n=4), imaging (n=2), mixed techniques (n=2), and tissue impedance (n=1). Accuracy ranged from 35.56% to 94.23% and Clarke error grid (A+B) ranged from 86.91% to 100%. The most popular machine learning algorithm used was random forest (n=10) and the most popular deep learning model was the artificial neural network (n=6). The mean overall checklist for assessment of medical AI score on the included papers was 33.5 (SD 3.09), suggesting an average of medium quality. The studies reviewed demonstrate that some AI techniques can accurately predict glucose levels from noninvasive sources while enhancing comfort and ease of use for patients. However, the overall range of accuracy was wide due to the heterogeneity of models and input data.

conclusionsEfforts are needed to standardize and regulate the use of AI technologies in BGM, as well as develop consensus guidelines and protocols to ensure the quality and safety of AI-assisted monitoring systems. The use of AI for NIBGM is a promising area of research that has the potential to revolutionize diabetes management.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringBlood GlucoseHumansBlood Glucoseaccuracyartificial intelligenceblood glucosedeep learningdiabeteshealth informaticsheterogeneitymachine learningmanagementmobile phonemonitoringnoninvasivescoping reviewself-monitoring

Identifiers

PMID39561353
PMCPMC11615544

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.