Amperometric Glucose Sensors: Sources of Error and Potential Benefit of Redundancy
Open accessAbstract
Amperometric glucose sensors have advanced the care of patients with diabetes and are being studied to control insulin delivery in the research setting. However, at times, currently available sensors demonstrate suboptimal accuracy, which can result from calibration error, sensor drift, or lag. Inaccuracy can be particularly problematic in a closed-loop glycemic control system. In such a system, the use of two sensors allows selection of the more accurate sensor as the input to the controller. In our studies in subjects with type 1 diabetes, the accuracy of the better of two sensors significantly exceeded the accuracy of a single, randomly selected sensor. If an array with three or more sensors were available, it would likely allow even better accuracy with the use of voting.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The erratic outputs with posture changes were attributed in part to blood occlusion from pressures applied to tissue adjacent to the sensor.
“Such behavior was attributed in part to blood occlusion due to pressures applied to tissue adjacent to the sensor.86–87”
From Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices (2013) · cites this paper as [86]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 19 · Cited by 95
- Authors
- Castle, J. R., & Ward, W. K.
- Affiliations
- Oregon Health Services University, Portland, Oregon
- Corresponding author
- Ward, W. Kenneth
- ORCID
- Castle, Jessica R.
- Venue
- Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2010-01
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 221-225
- ISSN
- 1932-2968 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2825644
- OpenAlex
- W1964143445
- Cited by
- 95
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 5.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (T32DK007674)
- National Center for Research Resources (M01RR000334)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Electrochemical sensors and biosensors
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pancreatic function and diabetes
- Keywords
- amperometric glucose sensor, sensor error, sensor redundancy, sensor drift, calibration error, type 1 diabetes, insulin delivery, sensor arrays
- MeSH terms
- Blood Glucose, Calibration, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Equipment Design, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Insulin Infusion Systems, Research Design, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring, Biosensing Techniques, Infusion Pumps, Implantable, Monitoring, Ambulatory, Equipment Failure Analysis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
