Objective:To examine the effect of cumulative hemoglobin A 1c (HbA 1c) levels and insulin dosage on insulin resistance (IR)-related metabolic disturbances in newly diagnosed patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods:This retrospective cohort study included T1D patients admitted to the Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University from November 2015 to March 2023. Clinical data collected comprised age, sex, disease duration, insulin dosage, body mass index, waist circumference, blood pressure, HbA 1c levels, islet autoantibodies, and fasting blood lipid profiles. IR-related metabolic disturbances assessed were overweight, obesity, central obesity, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. Cox regression and cluster analyses were applied to assess the influence of cumulative HbA 1c and insulin dosage on these metabolic disturbances. Results:A total of 235 patients were included, with 97 males (41.3%) and 138 females (58.7%). The median age was 19.8 (13.3, 31.1) years, and the median follow-up duration was 30.8 (20.8, 45.6) months. During follow-up, 41.6% (72/173) of patients developed IR-related metabolic disturbances. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that a cumulative HbA 1c ≥60 mmol/mol was an independent risk factor for any IR-related metabolic disturbance [ HR (95% CI): 1.739 (1.067-2.835) ] and for triglyceride abnormalities [ HR (95% CI): 3.277 (1.176-9.127)]. Additionally, a cumulative insulin dosage ≥0.5 U·kg -1·d -1 was identified as an independent risk factor for overweight, obesity, or central obesity [ HR (95% CI): 2.374 (1.059-5.323)]. Cluster analysis further identified that patients with higher levels of cumulative HbA 1c and insulin dosage, particularly those with adolescent-onset diabetes, had the highest likelihood of developing hypertension ( HR=2.460, 95% CI 1.008-6.005), overweight/obesity/central obesity ( HR=2.707, 95% CI 1.062-6.900), triglyceride abnormalities ( HR=5.495, 95% CI 1.842-16.391), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol abnormalities ( HR=11.054, 95% CI 4.107-29.751), and any IR-related metabolic disturbance ( HR=5.833, 95% CI 2.602-13.077). Conclusions:Elevated cumulative HbA 1c and insulin dosage levels in T1D patients are associated with an increased risk of developing IR-related metabolic disturbances. These findings underscore the urgent need for novel therapeutic strategies tailored to this population.

The precision dosing of antimicrobial agents serves as a key strategy to improve effectiveness while minimizing adverse drug effects, thereby enhancing therapeutic outcomes. It also aims to reduce the risk of antimicrobial resistance and optimize the utilization of healthcare resource. This article reviews the key technical elements of antimicrobial precision dosing, including novel therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) methods, the concepts, modelling and stimulation approaches, and model evaluation of model-informed precision dosing (MIPD), and the implementation of MIPD with clinical decision support system (CDSS). Meanwhile, applications on how artificial intelligence (AI) techniques facilitate MIPD are discussed. We hope that the advances discussed and perspectives presented in this article will provide insights into the precision dosing and individualized therapy of antimicrobials in clinical practice.

Background: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems studies are upsurging, half of which were published in the last 5 years. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AID systems in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov until August 31, 2023. Randomized clinical trials that compared AID systems with other insulin-based treatments in patients with T1DM were considered eligible. Studies characteristics and glycemic metrics was extracted by three researchers independently. Results: Sixty-five trials (3,623 patients) were included. The percentage of time in range (TIR) was 11.74% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.37 to 14.12; P<0.001) higher with AID systems compared with control treatments. Patients on AID systems had more pronounced improvement of time below range when diabetes duration was more than 20 years (–1.80% vs. –0.86%, P=0.031) and baseline glycosylated hemoglobin lower than 7.5% (–1.93% vs. –0.87%, P=0.033). Dual-hormone full closed-loop systems revealed a greater improvement in TIR compared with hybrid closed-loop systems (–19.64% vs. –10.87%). Notably, glycemia risk index (GRI) (–3.74; 95% CI, –6.34 to –1.14; P<0.01) was also improved with AID therapy. Conclusion AID systems showed significant advantages compared to other insulin-based treatments in improving glucose control represented by TIR and GRI in patients with T1DM, with more favorable effect in euglycemia by dual-hormone full closedloop systems as well as less hypoglycemia for patients who are within target for glycemic control and have longer diabetes duration.

Background: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems studies are upsurging, half of which were published in the last 5 years. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AID systems in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov until August 31, 2023. Randomized clinical trials that compared AID systems with other insulin-based treatments in patients with T1DM were considered eligible. Studies characteristics and glycemic metrics was extracted by three researchers independently. Results: Sixty-five trials (3,623 patients) were included. The percentage of time in range (TIR) was 11.74% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.37 to 14.12; P<0.001) higher with AID systems compared with control treatments. Patients on AID systems had more pronounced improvement of time below range when diabetes duration was more than 20 years (–1.80% vs. –0.86%, P=0.031) and baseline glycosylated hemoglobin lower than 7.5% (–1.93% vs. –0.87%, P=0.033). Dual-hormone full closed-loop systems revealed a greater improvement in TIR compared with hybrid closed-loop systems (–19.64% vs. –10.87%). Notably, glycemia risk index (GRI) (–3.74; 95% CI, –6.34 to –1.14; P<0.01) was also improved with AID therapy. Conclusion AID systems showed significant advantages compared to other insulin-based treatments in improving glucose control represented by TIR and GRI in patients with T1DM, with more favorable effect in euglycemia by dual-hormone full closedloop systems as well as less hypoglycemia for patients who are within target for glycemic control and have longer diabetes duration.

Background: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems studies are upsurging, half of which were published in the last 5 years. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AID systems in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov until August 31, 2023. Randomized clinical trials that compared AID systems with other insulin-based treatments in patients with T1DM were considered eligible. Studies characteristics and glycemic metrics was extracted by three researchers independently. Results: Sixty-five trials (3,623 patients) were included. The percentage of time in range (TIR) was 11.74% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.37 to 14.12; P<0.001) higher with AID systems compared with control treatments. Patients on AID systems had more pronounced improvement of time below range when diabetes duration was more than 20 years (–1.80% vs. –0.86%, P=0.031) and baseline glycosylated hemoglobin lower than 7.5% (–1.93% vs. –0.87%, P=0.033). Dual-hormone full closed-loop systems revealed a greater improvement in TIR compared with hybrid closed-loop systems (–19.64% vs. –10.87%). Notably, glycemia risk index (GRI) (–3.74; 95% CI, –6.34 to –1.14; P<0.01) was also improved with AID therapy. Conclusion AID systems showed significant advantages compared to other insulin-based treatments in improving glucose control represented by TIR and GRI in patients with T1DM, with more favorable effect in euglycemia by dual-hormone full closedloop systems as well as less hypoglycemia for patients who are within target for glycemic control and have longer diabetes duration.

OBJECTIVE: To propose a machine learning-based method for predicting the trajectories during manual acupuncture manipulation (MAM), aiming to improve the precision and consistency of acupuncture practitioner' operation and provide the real-time suggestions on MAM error correction. METHODS: Computer vision technology was used to analyze the hand micromotion when holding needle during acupuncture, and provide a three-dimensional coordinate description method of the index finger joints of the holding hand. Focusing on the 4 typical motions of MAM, a machine learning-based MAM trajectory predictive model was designed. By integrating the changes of phalangeal joint angle and hand skeletal information of acupuncture practitioner, the motion trajectory of the index finger joint was predicted accurately. Besides, the roles of machine learning-based MAM trajectory predictive model in the skill transmission of acupuncture manipulation were verified by stratified randomized controlled trial. RESULTS: The performance of MAM trajectory predictive model, based on the long short-term memory network (LSTM), obtained the highest stability and precision, up to 98%. The learning effect was improved when the model applied to the skill transmission of acupuncture manipulation. CONCLUSION The machine learning-based MAM predictive model provides acupuncture practitioner with precise action prediction and feedback. It is valuable and significant for the inheritance and error correction of manual operation of acupuncture.
Humans ; Acupuncture Therapy/instrumentation* ; Machine Learning ; Adult ; Male ; Female

Background: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems studies are upsurging, half of which were published in the last 5 years. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AID systems in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov until August 31, 2023. Randomized clinical trials that compared AID systems with other insulin-based treatments in patients with T1DM were considered eligible. Studies characteristics and glycemic metrics was extracted by three researchers independently. Results: Sixty-five trials (3,623 patients) were included. The percentage of time in range (TIR) was 11.74% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.37 to 14.12; P<0.001) higher with AID systems compared with control treatments. Patients on AID systems had more pronounced improvement of time below range when diabetes duration was more than 20 years (–1.80% vs. –0.86%, P=0.031) and baseline glycosylated hemoglobin lower than 7.5% (–1.93% vs. –0.87%, P=0.033). Dual-hormone full closed-loop systems revealed a greater improvement in TIR compared with hybrid closed-loop systems (–19.64% vs. –10.87%). Notably, glycemia risk index (GRI) (–3.74; 95% CI, –6.34 to –1.14; P<0.01) was also improved with AID therapy. Conclusion AID systems showed significant advantages compared to other insulin-based treatments in improving glucose control represented by TIR and GRI in patients with T1DM, with more favorable effect in euglycemia by dual-hormone full closedloop systems as well as less hypoglycemia for patients who are within target for glycemic control and have longer diabetes duration.