ArticlePLOS digital health2025
Racial disparities in continuous glucose monitoring-based 60-min glucose predictions among people with type 1 diabetes.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-Hispanic white (White) populations are overrepresented in medical studies. Potential healthcare disparities can happen when machine learning models, used in diabetes technologies, are trained on data from primarily White patients. We aimed to evaluate algorithmic fairness in glucose predictions. This study utilized continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data from 101 White and 104 Black participants with type 1 diabetes collected by the JAEB Center for Health Research, US. Long short-term memory (LSTM) deep learning models were trained on 11 datasets of different proportions of White and Black participants and tailored to each individual using transfer learning to predict glucose 60 minutes ahead based on 60-minute windows. Root mean squared errors (RMSE) were calculated for each participant. Linear mixed-effect models were used to investigate the association between racial composition and RMSE while accounting for age, sex, and training data size. A median of 9 weeks (IQR: 7, 10) of CGM data was available per participant. The divergence in performance (RMSE slope by proportion) was not statistically significant for either group. However, the slope difference (from 0% White and 100% Black to 100% White and 0% Black) between groups was statistically significant (p = 0.02), meaning the RMSE increased 0.04 [0.01, 0.08] mmol/L more for Black participants compared to White participants when the proportion of White participants increased from 0 to 100% in the training data. This difference was attenuated in the transfer learned models (RMSE: 0.02 [-0.01, 0.05] mmol/L, p = 0.20). The racial composition of training data created a small statistically significant difference in the performance of the models, which was not present after using transfer learning. This demonstrates the importance of diversity in datasets and the potential value of transfer learning for developing more fair prediction models.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
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.