为评估 1 型糖尿病患者的连续血糖监测数据开发三维评分模型。

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q2 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Jeanie Dawnbringer, Henrik Hill, Markus Lundgren, Sergiu-Bogdan Catrina, José Caballero-Corbalan, Lars Cederblad, Per-Ola Carlsson, Daniel Espes
{"title":"为评估 1 型糖尿病患者的连续血糖监测数据开发三维评分模型。","authors":"Jeanie Dawnbringer, Henrik Hill, Markus Lundgren, Sergiu-Bogdan Catrina, José Caballero-Corbalan, Lars Cederblad, Per-Ola Carlsson, Daniel Espes","doi":"10.1136/bmjdrc-2024-004350","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Despite the improvements in diabetes management by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) it is difficult to capture the complexity of CGM data in one metric. We aimed to develop a clinically relevant multidimensional scoring model with the capacity to identify the most alarming CGM episodes and/or patients from a large cohort.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>Retrospective CGM data from 2017 to 2020 available in electronic medical records were collected from n=613 individuals with type 1 diabetes (total 82 114 days). A scoring model was developed based on three metrics; glycemic variability percentage, low blood glucose index and high blood glucose index. Values for each dimension were normalized to a numeric score between 0-100. To identify the most representative score for an extended time period, multiple ways to combine the mean score of each dimension were evaluated. Correlations of the scoring model with CGM metrics were computed. The scoring model was compared with interpretations of a clinical expert board (CEB).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The dimension of hypoglycemia must be weighted to be representative, whereas the other two can be represented by their overall mean. The scoring model correlated well with established CGM metrics. Applying a score of ≥80 as the cut-off for identifying time periods with a 'true' target fulfillment (ie, reaching all targets for CGM metrics) resulted in an accuracy of 93.4% and a specificity of 97.1%. The accuracy of the scoring model when compared with the CEB was high for identifying the most alarming CGM curves within each dimension of glucose control (overall 86.5%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our scoring model captures the complexity of CGM data and can identify both the most alarming dimension of glycemia and the individuals in most urgent need of assistance. This could become a valuable tool for population management at diabetes clinics to enable healthcare providers to stratify care to the patients in greatest need of clinical attention.</p>","PeriodicalId":9151,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care","volume":"12 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11381645/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of a three-dimensional scoring model for the assessment of continuous glucose monitoring data in type 1 diabetes.\",\"authors\":\"Jeanie Dawnbringer, Henrik Hill, Markus Lundgren, Sergiu-Bogdan Catrina, José Caballero-Corbalan, Lars Cederblad, Per-Ola Carlsson, Daniel Espes\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjdrc-2024-004350\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Despite the improvements in diabetes management by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) it is difficult to capture the complexity of CGM data in one metric. We aimed to develop a clinically relevant multidimensional scoring model with the capacity to identify the most alarming CGM episodes and/or patients from a large cohort.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>Retrospective CGM data from 2017 to 2020 available in electronic medical records were collected from n=613 individuals with type 1 diabetes (total 82 114 days). A scoring model was developed based on three metrics; glycemic variability percentage, low blood glucose index and high blood glucose index. Values for each dimension were normalized to a numeric score between 0-100. To identify the most representative score for an extended time period, multiple ways to combine the mean score of each dimension were evaluated. Correlations of the scoring model with CGM metrics were computed. The scoring model was compared with interpretations of a clinical expert board (CEB).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The dimension of hypoglycemia must be weighted to be representative, whereas the other two can be represented by their overall mean. The scoring model correlated well with established CGM metrics. Applying a score of ≥80 as the cut-off for identifying time periods with a 'true' target fulfillment (ie, reaching all targets for CGM metrics) resulted in an accuracy of 93.4% and a specificity of 97.1%. The accuracy of the scoring model when compared with the CEB was high for identifying the most alarming CGM curves within each dimension of glucose control (overall 86.5%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our scoring model captures the complexity of CGM data and can identify both the most alarming dimension of glycemia and the individuals in most urgent need of assistance. This could become a valuable tool for population management at diabetes clinics to enable healthcare providers to stratify care to the patients in greatest need of clinical attention.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9151,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care\",\"volume\":\"12 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11381645/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2024-004350\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2024-004350","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:尽管连续血糖监测(CGM)改善了糖尿病管理,但很难用一个指标来反映 CGM 数据的复杂性。我们旨在开发一种与临床相关的多维评分模型,该模型能够从一个大型队列中识别出最令人担忧的CGM事件和/或患者:从电子病历中收集了2017年至2020年的CGM回顾性数据,数据来自613名1型糖尿病患者(共计82 114天)。根据血糖变异性百分比、低血糖指数和高血糖指数这三个指标建立了一个评分模型。每个维度的数值都被归一化为 0-100 之间的数值分值。为了确定在一个较长的时间段内最具代表性的分数,对组合每个维度平均分数的多种方法进行了评估。计算了评分模型与 CGM 指标的相关性。评分模型与临床专家委员会(CEB)的解释进行了比较:结果:低血糖维度必须经过加权才能具有代表性,而其他两个维度可以用其总平均值来表示。该评分模型与已有的 CGM 指标有很好的相关性。将得分≥80 分作为识别 "真正 "达到目标的时间段(即达到 CGM 指标的所有目标)的临界值,准确率为 93.4%,特异性为 97.1%。与 CEB 相比,该评分模型在识别血糖控制各维度中最令人担忧的 CGM 曲线方面具有很高的准确性(总体准确率为 86.5%):我们的评分模型捕捉到了 CGM 数据的复杂性,既能识别血糖最令人担忧的维度,也能识别最急需帮助的个体。这将成为糖尿病诊所进行人群管理的重要工具,使医疗服务提供者能够对最需要临床关注的患者进行分层护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Development of a three-dimensional scoring model for the assessment of continuous glucose monitoring data in type 1 diabetes.

Introduction: Despite the improvements in diabetes management by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) it is difficult to capture the complexity of CGM data in one metric. We aimed to develop a clinically relevant multidimensional scoring model with the capacity to identify the most alarming CGM episodes and/or patients from a large cohort.

Research design and methods: Retrospective CGM data from 2017 to 2020 available in electronic medical records were collected from n=613 individuals with type 1 diabetes (total 82 114 days). A scoring model was developed based on three metrics; glycemic variability percentage, low blood glucose index and high blood glucose index. Values for each dimension were normalized to a numeric score between 0-100. To identify the most representative score for an extended time period, multiple ways to combine the mean score of each dimension were evaluated. Correlations of the scoring model with CGM metrics were computed. The scoring model was compared with interpretations of a clinical expert board (CEB).

Results: The dimension of hypoglycemia must be weighted to be representative, whereas the other two can be represented by their overall mean. The scoring model correlated well with established CGM metrics. Applying a score of ≥80 as the cut-off for identifying time periods with a 'true' target fulfillment (ie, reaching all targets for CGM metrics) resulted in an accuracy of 93.4% and a specificity of 97.1%. The accuracy of the scoring model when compared with the CEB was high for identifying the most alarming CGM curves within each dimension of glucose control (overall 86.5%).

Conclusions: Our scoring model captures the complexity of CGM data and can identify both the most alarming dimension of glycemia and the individuals in most urgent need of assistance. This could become a valuable tool for population management at diabetes clinics to enable healthcare providers to stratify care to the patients in greatest need of clinical attention.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care
BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care Medicine-Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
2.40%
发文量
123
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care is an open access journal committed to publishing high-quality, basic and clinical research articles regarding type 1 and type 2 diabetes, and associated complications. Only original content will be accepted, and submissions are subject to rigorous peer review to ensure the publication of high-quality — and evidence-based — original research articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信