Back

Daily Rhythms in Blood Glucose: Time-of-Day Forecasts in Type 2 Diabetes

Pedersen, N. P. B.; Bugaksji, T. K.; Vera-Valdes, J. E.; Casper, S. H.; Jensen, M. H.; Vestergaard, P.; Kronborg, T.

2025-06-04 endocrinology
10.1101/2025.06.02.25328803 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundAccurate and interpretable forecasting of blood glucose levels is critical for effective manage- ment of Type 2 diabetes. While complex machine learning models offer high predictive accuracy, their opacity often limits clinical applicability. This study investigates the perfor- mance of a simple, interpretable reference model: the time-of-day mean forecast. MethodThe proposed approach divides each 24-hour period into discrete time sequences and, for each sequence, computes the mean glucose value across previous days. This methodology captures intra-day regularities in glucose dynamics and implicitly accounts for circadian influences, such as variations in insulin sensitivity and hepatic glucose production. ResultsThe model reflects intra-day glucose patterns and identifies clinically relevant periods of elevated variability, such as the postprandial and nocturnal windows. Forecasting performance improves with increased temporal granularity: in 91.84% of the individuals, at least one finer bin size outperformed the naive baseline. Where, 51% achieved optimal performance using the highest resolution with a 5-minute bin size. Compared to the naive approach, the 5-minute bin size reduced mean squared error by an average of 12.2%. ConclusionsWe have justified the time-of-day approach using a simple mean forecast model, showing that aligning prediction windows with time-of-day patterns enhances forecast accuracy. Building on this foundation, the time-of-day mean forecast serves as a practical benchmark. Future work should explore more complex models that incorporate individual covariates and dynamic temporal dependencies, while maintaining interpretability using the described temporal structure.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.