Evidence mapPaperPMID 41071985Full record

ArticleJMIR diabetes2025

Managing Exercise-Related Glycemic Events in Type 1 Diabetes: Development and Validation of Predictive Models for a Practical Decision Support Tool.

Sisi Ma, Ryan Coopergard, Mark Clements, Lisa Chow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR diabetes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Sisi MaDepartment of Medicine, Medical School, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2956-6844
Ryan CoopergardInstitute for Health Informatics, University of Minnesota, 420 Delaware Street SE, Minneapolis, MN, 55401, United States, 1 6126267788.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-0901-0700
Mark ClementsSchool of Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, MO, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2368-0331
Lisa ChowDivision of Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, Medical School, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6210-2307

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Exercise is an important aspect of diabetes self-management. Patients with type 1 diabetes frequently struggle with exercise-induced hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, decreasing their willingness to exercise. Objective: We aim to build accurate and easy-to-deploy models to forecast exercise-induced glycemic events in real-world settings. Methods: We analyzed free-living data from the Type 1 Diabetes Exercise Initiative study, where adults with type 1 diabetes wore a continuous glucose monitor (CGM) while performing video-guided exercises (30-minute exercises at least 6 times over 4 weeks), along with concurrent detailed phenotyping of their insulin program and diet. We built models to predict glycemic events (blood glucose ≤54 mg/dL, ≤70 mg/dL, ≥200 mg/dL, and ≥250 mg/dL) during and 1 hour post exercise with variables from 4 data modalities, such as demographic and clinical (eg, glycated hemoglobin; CGM (blood glucose value and their summary statistics); carbohydrate intake and insulin administration; and exercise type, duration, and intensity. We used repeated stratified nested cross-validation for model selection and performance estimation. We evaluated the relative contribution of the 4 input data modalities for predicting glycemic events, which informs the cost and benefit for including them in the decision support tool for risk prediction. We also evaluated other important aspects related to model translation into decision support tools, including model calibration and sensitivity to noisy inputs. Results: Our models were built based on 1901 exercise episodes for 329 participants. The median age for the participants was 34 (IQR 26-48) years. Of the participants, 74.8% (246/329) are female and 94.5% (311/329) are White. A total of 182/329 (55.3%) participants used a closed-loop insulin delivery system, while the rest used a pump without a closed-loop system. Models incorporating information from all 4 data modalities showed excellent predictive performance with cross-validated area under the receiver operating curves (AUROCs) ranging from mean 0.880 (SD 0.057) to mean 0.992 (SD 0.001) for different glycemic events. Models built with CGM data alone have statistically indistinguishable performance compared to models using all data modalities, indicating the other 3 data modalities do not add additional information with respect to predicting exercise-related glycemic events. The models based solely on CGM data also showed outstanding calibration (Brier score ≤0.08) and resilience to noisy input. Conclusions: We successfully constructed models to forecast exercise-induced glycemic events using only CGM data as input with excellent predictive performance, calibration, and robustness. In addition, these models are based on automatically captured CGM data, thus easy to deploy and maintain and incurring minimal user burden, enabling model translation into a decision support tool.

Indexed as

continuous glucose monitoringdecision support toolexercise-induced glycemic eventshyperglycemiahypoglycemiapredictive modelingtype 1 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID41071985
PMCPMC12513686

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.