By Topic

Nonlinear Mixed Effects to Improve Glucose Minimal Model Parameter Estimation: A Simulation Study in Intensive and Sparse Sampling

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$33 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

4 Author(s)
Paolo Denti ; Dept. of Inf. Eng., Univ. of Padova, Padova, Italy ; Alessandra Bertoldo ; Paolo Vicini ; Claudio Cobelli*

Intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) minimal model parameters are commonly estimated by weighted least squares (WLSs) on each subject data. Sometimes, with sparse data, individual parameters cannot be satisfactorily obtained. In such cases, a population approach could be preferable. These methods allow borrowing information across all subjects simultaneously, quantifying population features directly, and subsequently, deriving individual parameter estimates. In this paper, we assessed different estimation methods on simulated datasets. Besides the standard WLS approach, we applied iterative procedures (iterative two-stage (ITS) and global two-stage (GTS) methods) as well as nonlinear mixed-effects models (NLMEMs), where the likelihood is based on model linearization: first-order (FO), FO conditional estimation (FOCE), and Laplace (LAP) approximations. The synthetic dataset, initially very rich, was progressively reduced (by 50% and 75%) in order to assess the robustness of the results in sparsely sampled situations. Our results show that, even with intensive sampling, population approaches provide more reliable parameter estimates. Moreover, these estimates are remarkably more robust when the data become scarce. ITS and GTS encounter critical problems when single subjects have very poor sampling schedules, whereas the NLMEM (excluding FO) methods are more versatile and able to cope with such situations. FOCE appears as the most satisfactory approach.

Published in:

IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering  (Volume:56 ,  Issue: 9 )