Performance of continuous glucose monitoring-based meal detection algorithms in young healthy adults

Abstract Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) enables automated detection of eating events via meal detection algorithms (MDAs); however, CGM-only MDAs have not been comprehensively evaluated using a shared dataset. We compared nine published CGM-only MDAs using standardized metrics by testing them with CGM data from 16 young, healthy, normal-weight adults under free-living conditions. We employed a per-participant holdout design, with separate training, validation, and testing sets, and assessed performance on the test set (216 meals) using sensitivity, false positives per day (FP/day), and detection time (Δt). Sensitivity ranged from 49 to 90%, FP/day from 0.12 to 2.42, and Δt from 37 to 61 min. Fuzzy logic and simulation-based approaches showed the highest sensitivity (90% and 83%) but slower detection (> 59 min) and higher FP rates (> 1.28/day). Pattern-recognition classifiers (82%, 0.39 FP/day, 44 min; 77%, 0.33, 42 min) and a glucose-insulin-model-based method (77%, 0.22, 41 min) showed more balanced performance, while rate-of-change detectors were faster (37–38 min) but less sensitive (70–72%). No single MDA consistently outperformed others across metrics. Pattern-recognition and physiological modeling approaches demonstrated the most balanced performance, whereas rate-of-change methods enabled faster detection with reduced accuracy. Algorithm choice should reflect application priorities, such as early detection versus reliability.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2026-05-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-50699-5
Primary Topic
Diabetes Management and Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Performance of continuous glucose monitoring-based meal detection algorithms in young healthy adults

Scientific Reports
Diabetes Management and Research
article

Performance of continuous glucose monitoring-based meal detection algorithms in young healthy adults

article en

Abstract

Abstract Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) enables automated detection of eating events via meal detection algorithms (MDAs); however, CGM-only MDAs have not been comprehensively evaluated using a shared dataset. We compared nine published CGM-only MDAs using standardized metrics by testing them with CGM data from 16 young, healthy, normal-weight adults under free-living conditions. We employed a per-participant holdout design, with separate training, validation, and testing sets, and assessed performance on the test set (216 meals) using sensitivity, false positives per day (FP/day), and detection time (Δt). Sensitivity ranged from 49 to 90%, FP/day from 0.12 to 2.42, and Δt from 37 to 61 min. Fuzzy logic and simulation-based approaches showed the highest sensitivity (90% and 83%) but slower detection (> 59 min) and higher FP rates (> 1.28/day). Pattern-recognition classifiers (82%, 0.39 FP/day, 44 min; 77%, 0.33, 42 min) and a glucose-insulin-model-based method (77%, 0.22, 41 min) showed more balanced performance, while rate-of-change detectors were faster (37–38 min) but less sensitive (70–72%). No single MDA consistently outperformed others across metrics. Pattern-recognition and physiological modeling approaches demonstrated the most balanced performance, whereas rate-of-change methods enabled faster detection with reduced accuracy. Algorithm choice should reflect application priorities, such as early detection versus reliability.

Scientific Reports
Technical University of Munich (DE)
Technische Universität München
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Diabetes Management and Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.