Almanac A1C

Continuous Glucose Monitoring: From Medical Device to Wellness Tool – How Real-Time Metabolic Data and AI Are Revolutionizing Preventive Health

Posted

by

dr. Karunia Valeriani Japar

Table of Contents
Keywords: , , , ,

Introduction

Wearing a continuous glucose monitor (CGM) is increasingly recognized as a smart health choice, not merely a medical necessity reserved for people living with diabetes. Instead, CGM represents an innovative step toward preventive medicine, empowering individuals to understand and optimize their metabolic health proactively. As wearable health technology becomes mainstream, the act of monitoring one’s glucose in real has evolved into a symbol of awareness and commitment to lifelong wellness, challenging the outdated stereotype that it’s only for the sick.

In this new era, CGM is more than a clinical device, it’s an actionable tool for everyone seeking to improve daily nutrition, physical activity, and stress resilience through personalized data. By shifting the narrative from illness management to health optimization, the use of CGM marks a modern approach to metabolic disease prevention, where tracking and flexing health data is a celebration of vitality and proactive stand against future risk.

The rising prevalence of metabolic diseases including type 2 diabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular conditions underscores the urgent need for early detection and prevention strategies that extend beyond traditional clinical settings. CGM technology, once exclusively used for diabetes management, is now being embraced by health conscious -individuals and integrated into AI-driven health platforms that offer personalized insights and real-time feedback this democratization of metabolic monitoring reflects a cultural shift: health is no longer defined by the absence of disease but by the active pursuit of optimal metabolic function and longevity.

The Science and Evolution of CGM

How Continuous Glucose Monitoring Works: Technology, Accuracy, And Insights

Continuous glucose monitoring represents a sophisticated integration of biochemistry, electrochemistry, and digital technology designed to provide real-time insights into metabolic dynamics. At its core, a CGM system consists of three essential components: a subcutaneous sensor that measures glucose levels, a transmitter that wirelessly communicates data, and a display device, often a smartphone or dedicated receiver that presents glucose readings to the user. Unlike traditional fingerstick blood glucose measurements that provide isolate snapshots, CGM devices capture glucose data every 1 to 15 minutes, generating a continuous metabolic profile throughout the day and night [1,2,3,4].

The underlying technology of most approved CGM systems relies on enzymatic electrochemical detection, specifically employing glucose oxidase (GOx) as the biological catalyst. When glucose molecules from interstitial fluid interact with the immobilized Gox enzyme on the sensor electrode, a cascade of oxidation reactions occurs: glucose is converted to gluconic acid while the enzyme’s flavin adenine dinucleotide (FAD) cofactor is reduced to FADH2. This reduced form is then reoxidized, generating an electrical current proportional to the glucose concentration. The amperometric signal produced by this electrochemical reaction is continuously measured, processed through sophisticated algorithms, and converted into displayable glucose values. Modern sensors incorporate multiple generations of biosensor technology, with third-generation devices featuring direct electron transfer mechanisms that enhance sensitivity and reduce interference from other electroactive substances [3,5,6,7].

The accuracy of CGM systems has evolved dramatically since their introduction in 1999. Early devices demonstrated mean absolute relative difference (MARD) values exceeding 20%, limiting their clinical utility. However, contemporary CGM sensors now achieve MARD values below 10%, with some systems reporting accuracy as low as 7-9%. MARD quantifies the average deviation between CGM readings and reference blood glucose measurements, with lower percentages indicating greater precision. Clinical validation studies using Clarke error grid analysis demonstrate that over 86-99% of modern CGM reading fall within clinically acceptable zones, meaning the data reliably guide treatment decisions without risk of erroneous interventions. Despite these improvements, inherent physiological and technological factors contribute to measurement delays and variability that users must understand [8,9,10,11,12,13,14].

One critical consideration is the time lag between blood glucose and interstitial fluid glucose, the compartment where CGM sensor measure. Glucose must diffuse from capillaries through interstitial spaces to reach the sensor, a process influenced by local blood flow, tissue perfusion, and permeability. Under steady glycemic conditions, this physiological delay averages 5-10 minutes, but during rapid glucose fluctuations such as after meals or exercise, the lag can extend to 12-24 minutes or longer. Additionally, technological delays arise from glucose diffusion through protective sensor membranes and signal processing algorithms. Modern CGM systems incorporate predictive algorithms and advanced filtering techniques to compensate for these delays, improving real-time accuracy and enabling users to anticipate glycemic trends rather than merely reacting to current values [9,13,14,15].

Integration Of Continuous Glucose Monitoring with Artificial Intelligence for Personalized Metabolic Health

The convergence of continuous glucose monitoring and artificial intelligence has ushered in a transformative era for personalized metabolic health management, extending the utility of CGM far beyond diabetes treatment into preventive and wellness applications. AI algorithms excel at extracting complex pattern from the vast, high-dimensional datasets generated by CGM devices, patterns that remain invisible to traditional statistical methods or human interpretation. By analyzing continuous glucose streams alongside contextual data such as dietary intake, physical activity, sleep patterns, and stress markers, machine learning models can identify individual specific glucose response signatures and deliver personalized, actionable insights in real time [16,17,18,19,20].

Deep learning architectures, including convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and recurrent neural networks (RNNs), have demonstrated remarkable accuracy in predicting future glucose trajectories based on historical CGM data. Studies show that AI-powered prediction models can forecast glucose levels 15 to 60 minutes in advance with root-mean-square errors as low as 0.19-059 mmol/L and correlation coefficients exceeding 0.96. These predictive capabilities enable proactive interventions, such as preemptive carbohydrate consumption to prevent hypoglycemia or activity adjustments to avoid hyperglycemic excursions rather than reactive responses. Importantly, personalized AI models that incorporate fine tuning strategies for individual users consistently outperform generalized models, reflecting the profound inter-individual variability in glycemic responses to identical meals, exercise, and stressors [16,21,22,23,24].

Beyond glucose prediction, AI-enhanced CGM platforms are revolutionizing personalized nutrition by identifying specific foods, meal compositions, and eating patterns that optimize individual metabolic responses. Machine learning algorithms can detect subtle postprandial glucose patterns associated with particular dietary components and generate tailored nutritional recommendations that minimize glycemic variability. For example, AI systems integrated with CGM have achieved up to 40% reductions in glycemic excursions by providing real-time feedback on food choices and portions sizes. Reinforcement learning approaches enable continuous adaptation of recommendations based on ongoing CGM data and user feedback, creating dynamic feedback loops that progressively refine metabolic optimization strategies. A recent study demonstrated that an AI-supported CGM mobile application significantly improved time in rage (TIR) across diverse populations, from 74.7% to 85.5% in healthy individuals and from 49.7% to 57.4% in those with type 2 diabetes while simultaneously promoting weight loss [17,19,20,23].

The AI-driven personalization extends to early detection and risk stratification for prediabetes and metabolic dysfunction, even before conventional diagnostic thresholds are reached. By training deep learning models on CGM-derived “glucose fingerprints,” AI systems can identify individuals at elevated risk for developing type 2 diabetes with precision exceeding traditional biomarkers like fasting glucose or HbA1c. this capability transforms CGM from a monitoring tool into a preventive diagnostic platform, enabling timely lifestyle interventions and reducing the burden of metabolic disease at the population level. Furthermore, explainable AI methodologies provide transparency into algorithmic decision making, helping users understand why specific recommendations are made and fostering trust and adherence. As AI technologies continue to mature, their integration with CGM promises to democratize access to personalized metabolic insights, making precision health accessible to a broader population beyond those with established disease [16,17,18,19,20,25,26].

CGM Beyond Diabetes

Benefits of CGM for Non-Diabetics: Early Detection and Proactive Prevention

The expansion of continuous glucose monitoring beyond traditional diabetes management represents a paradigm shift in preventive healthcare, offering individuals without diagnosed metabolic health status. For healthy individuals and those in the prediabetic gray zone, CGM functions as a powerful early-warning system that detects subclinical metabolic dysfunction years before conventional diagnostic criteria are met. This proactive surveillance enables timely lifestyle modifications that can reverse prediabetes, delay or prevent progression to type 2 diabetes, and mitigate cardiovascular risk, addressing metabolic disease at its most modifiable stage [27,28,29,30,31,32].

Emerging research demonstrates that CGM technology possesses remarkable sensitivity in identifying early indicators of metabolic dysregulation that traditional biomarkers like fasting glucose or HbA1c fail to capture. One of the most clinically significant patterns detectable by CGM is postprandial hyperglycemia, the exaggerated glucose elevation following meals that occurs in prediabetes even when fasting glucose remains normal. Studies reveal that two-hours postprandial glucose levels exceeding 7.8 mmol/L (140 mg/dL) are strongly associated with increased carotid intima media thickness, a marker of atherosclerosis, whereas fasting glucose and HbA1c show no such correlation. This finding highlights the critical importance of capturing glucose dynamics rather than static measurements. Additionally, CGM readily detects the dawn phenomenon, an early morning rise in glucose driven by overnight increases in growth hormone and cortisol that occurs physiologically in healthy individuals but becomes exaggerated in prediabetes due to insufficient compensatory insulin secretion [30,32,33,34,35].

The ability of CGM to quantify glycemic variability represents another transformative advantage for disease prevention. Glycemic Variability (GV), the magnitude and frequency of glucose fluctuations has emerged as an independent risk factor for diabetes complications and cardiovascular disease that may exceed the harmful effects of sustained hyperglycemia alone. In prediabetic individuals, elevated GV serves as a crucial biomarker signifying the transition from normal glucose regulation to impaired glucose tolerance, providing a therapeutic target for intervention before diabetes onset. Continuous monitoring reveals patterns invisible to intermittent testing: recurrent glucose spikes and crashes that generate oxidative stress, trigger inflammatory cascades, activate myeloid cells, promote endothelial dysfunction, and accelerate atherogenesis, even when average glucose and HbA1c remain within normal ranges [30,36,37,38].

Beyond detecting early pathology, CGM empowers non-diabetic users to make informed, personalized decision about diet, exercise, stress management, and sleep, lifestyle factors that profoundly influence metabolic health. Nearly half of healthy CGM users report that observing elevated glucose readings motivates subsequent physical activity, and these exercise behaviors confer cardiovascular and cognitive benefits that extend far beyond glucose control alone. Users consistently discover individual specific “trigger foods” that cause pronounced glucose spikes, optimal meal compositions that minimize glycemic excursions, and food sequencing strategies, such as consuming vegetables and proteins before carbohydrates, that blunt postprandial glucose rises. The real-time feedback loop created by CGM transforms abstract nutritional advice into concrete, actionable data, fostering sustained behavior change and metabolic optimization [27,28,31,39].

Importantly, CGM use in non-diabetics reveals the profound inter-individual variability in glycemic responses: two people consuming identical meals can exhibit vastly different glucose trajectories based on genetics, gut microbiome composition, activity levels, stress, sleep quality, and baseline metabolic health. This recognition underscores the limitations of generic dietary guidelines and reinforces the necessity of personalized nutrition approaches. Furthermore, many users are surprised to observe how psychological stress and poor sleep quality elevate glucose levels independent of food intake, highlighting the interconnectedness metabolic, psychological, and lifestyle factors. By providing continuous insight into these relationships, CGM serves not merely as a glucose monitor but as a comprehensive metabolic health platform that enables individuals to take an active, data-informed role in disease prevention and wellness optimization [27,28,31].

Understanding Metabolic Flexibility and Glycemic Variability

Metabolic flexibility, the capacity to efficiently switch between glucose and fatty acid oxidation in response to substrate availability, nutritional state, and energy demand, is a hallmark of optimal metabolic health and a key determinant of disease risk. This adaptive metabolic capability enables organisms to maintain energy homeostasis during periods of caloric excess or restriction, during fasted versus fed states, and across varying intensities of physical activity. At the molecular level, metabolic flexibility relies on coordinated regulation of metabolic pathways involving nutrient sensing, substrate uptake and transport, mitochondrial oxidative capacity, and enzymatic flux control, processes mediated by transcriptional, post-translational, and allosteric mechanisms. Healthy individuals demonstrate robust metabolic flexibility: during fasting or low carbohydrate availability, they efficiently oxidize fatty acids for energy, conversely, during carbohydrate rich meals or high intensity exercise, they rapidly transition to preferential glucose oxidation [40,41].

In contrast, metabolic inflexibility, the impaired ability to adaptively switch fuel sources is a defining characteristic of insulin resistance, obesity and type 2 diabetes. This metabolic rigidity manifests as an inability of skeletal muscle to increase glucose oxidation in response to insulin stimulation and a failure of adipose tissue to appropriately suppress lipolysis during insulin-mediated suppression. The result is persistent elevation of circulating free fatty acids that inhibit glucose uptake and oxidation through the Randle cycle, creating vicious cycle of worsening insulin resistance. Blunted suppression of lipolysis by insulin during hyper insulinemic- euglycemic clamp studies is strongly associated with reduced glycolytic metabolism and metabolic flexibility in both healthy individuals and those with diabetes, and this impairment segregate more by diabetes status than by adiposity alone. Importantly, metabolic inflexibility precedes the development of overt diabetes, making it a critical early target for preventive interventions [40,42].

Continuous glucose monitoring provides a powerful window into metabolic flexibility by revealing how efficiently individuals stabilize glucose levels across varying nutritional and physiological challenges. Metabolically flexible individuals maintain stable glucose within a narrow range, typically 70-140 mg/dL (3.9-7.8mmol/L) more than 95% of the time, demonstrating their capacity to match glucose disposal with glucose appearance and efficiently transition between oxidative substrates. In contrast, those with emerging metabolic inflexibility exhibit exaggerated postprandial glucose excursions, prolonged hyperglycemia following carbohydrate intake, and greater overall glycemic variability pattern that CGM cat detect before clinical diabetes develops [27,30,32,43,44].

Glycemic variability, quantified by CGM-derived metrics such as standard deviation (SD), coefficient of variation (CV), and mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE), has emerged as a critical indicator of metabolic health distinct from average glucose levels. The coefficient of variation, calculated as the standard deviation divided by mean glucose and expressed as a percentage, represents the preferred measure of glucose stability, with CV £ 36% considered the target threshold for stable glucose control and CV £33% often recommended for optimal metabolic health. Lower CV values indicate more consistent glucose levels and reduced risk of both hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia, whereas elevated CV reflects erratic glucose fluctuations that impose metabolic stress [36].

The clinical significance of glycemic variability extends far beyond diabetes management. Numerous studies demonstrate that high GV is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), acute coronary syndromes, heart failure hospitalization, and cardiovascular mortality associations that persist even after adjusting for average glucose and HbA1c. In patients with acute coronary syndrome, those with higher GV exhibit a two-fold increased risk of MACE at six months, and GV values exceeding 48.6 mg/dL predict poor outcomes after 1.5 years. The mechanisms linking GV to cardiovascular pathology involve oxidative stress and reactive oxygen species generation, coagulation abnormalities, vascular inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, and activation of inflammatory pathways that promote atherosclerosis. Critically, studies using mouse models of transient intermittent hyperglycemia, mimicking postprandial glucose spikes , demonstrate accelerated atherogenesis driven by neutrophil activation, myeloid cell expansion, and inflammatory mediator release, even when average glucose and HbA1c remain normal. These findings challenge the traditional focus on average glycemia and highlight the importance of minimizing glucose fluctuations for cardiovascular protection [37].

For non-diabetic individuals using CGM, understanding and optimizing glycemic variability offers a proactive strategy for disease prevention and performance enhancement. By monitoring time in range (TIR), the percentage of time glucose remains within the target 70-140 mg/dL range, users can assess their metabolic stability and identify interventions that reduce variability. Studies of healthy individuals wearing CGM reveal that they maintain glucose within 70-140 mg/dL approximately 97-98% of the time, with minimal excursions above 180 mg/dL and virtually no time below 70 mg/dL. Deviations from these patterns signal declining metabolic flexibility and warrant attention. Strategies to improve metabolic flexibility and reduce glycemic variability include adopting lower-carbohydrate or Mediterranean dietary patterns, increasing physical activity (particularly resistance and high-intensity interval training), optimizing sleep duration and quality, managing psychological stress, practicing time-restricted eating, and maintaining healthy body composition. By leveraging CGM data to guide these interventions, individuals can enhance their metabolic resilience, reduce chronic disease risk, and achieve sustained vitality, transforming glucose monitoring from a reactive diagnostic tool into a proactive wellness platform [27,40,46,47].

Empowerment Through Data and Lifestyle Choices

The advent of CGM has revolutionized the way individuals interact with their metabolic health by transforming abstract physiological processes into tangible, real-time data that empowers informed decision-making across nutrition, fitness, and stress management domains. CGM’s capability to continuously track glucose fluctuations provides a granular understanding of how specific foods, meal timing, physical activities, and even acute psychological stressors impact personal glycemic trends. This level of insight enables users regardless of health status to tailor their dietary choices, exercise routines, and lifestyle behaviours in alignment with their metabolic needs. For example, a well-timed walk after a carbohydrate-rich meal, identified by CGM feedback, may attenuate postprandial glucose spikes and lower cardiovascular risk. Similarly, users discover their individual “trigger foods” and optimal food sequencing strategies, such as consuming protein before carbohydrates, to stabilize glycemic excursions [48,49,50].

Integrating real-time CGM data into daily life essentially creates a biofeedback loop, fostering greater accountability and adherence to health-promoting behaviours. This data-driven approach is shown to enhance motivation, patient confidence, and sustained behaviour change, as users directly observe the immediate impact of lifestyle choices on glucose dynamics. Beyond diabetes, healthy and at-risk individuals utilize CGM to experiment with dietary regimens from low -carbohydrate patterns to intermittent fasting and assess their influence on both average glucose and glycemic variability. Exercise plans are adapted based on CGM readings to maximize metabolic efficiency, avoid exercise-induced hypoglycemia, and promote optimal energy utilization. Importantly, CGM also uncovers the profound effects of sleep deprivation and psychosocial stress on glucose regulation, prompting broader lifestyle interventions for holistic health management [27,49,50].

CGM stands as a transformative pathway to preventive health for all, transcending its clinical origins to democratize personalized metabolic insights. Its actionable data enables timely self-correction of unhealthy trends long before disease manifests: prolonged periods of subtle hyperglycemia or excessive glycemic variability undetected  by routine tests can signal emerging insulin resistance and prompt early interventions. For the health-conscious, CGM provides a continuous lens through which to optimize longevity, cognitive function, and athletic performance. For at-risk populations, it delivers targeted strategies to reduce chronic disease risk and improve quality of life. Its potential as a population health tool is being realized in digital health platforms and AI-powered nutrition programs, which integrate CGM data to craft individualized plans and foster community support for sustainable metabolic wellbeing. In sum, real-time glucose tracking with CGM empowers individuals to move beyond reactive health care into proactive, data-driven wellness making personalized prevention accessible to everyone [27,48,49,50].

Social Perception And the “Flexing Health” Movement

Historically, the perception of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and similar health technologies has been strongly coloured by medical stigma. In many societies, wearing a CGM device was seen as an outward sign of illness, weakness, or self-inflicted disease. Individuals with diabetes or at-risk populations often faced judgment, blame, or assumptions about personal responsibility for their condition perpetuating shame and discouraging proactive self-care. However, the rapid expansion of digital health culture and social media has begun to transform this narrative. Today, health-conscious communities and influencers are using CGM as a visible symbol of metabolic awareness and empowerment, framing it not as a mark of sickness but as a badge of commitment to preventive wellness and self-optimization. This reframing plays a critical role in breaking down harmful stereotypes, creating more inclusive and supportive attitudes around metabolic self-monitoring [27,50,51,52,53].

The so-called “flexing health” movement has seen CGM adoption become a trend among athletes, biohackers, technology enthusiasts, and everyday wellness advocates who want to broadcast their proactive approach to health management. Social media platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube have amplified this shift: wearing a CGM is now part of a new visual language associated with fitness tracking, quantified self, and digital wellness achievements. Enthusiasts share glucose graphs, meal experiments, and training results, openly celebrating metabolic optimization while normalizing routine self-monitoring for a broader public. This movement underscores a collective aspiration to move beyond reactive healthcare and toward data-driven personal optimization, real-time feedback, and prevention. As CGM technologies mature, adoption has accelerated, spurred not only by regulatory expansion and tech innovation, but also by market disruption from non-diabetic, fitness-focused populations whose wellness status is intertwined with their health data [20,55,56.

Ultimately, the changing social perception of CGM signals a democratization of health technology, where wearing a biosensor is increasingly interpreted as a sign of self-awareness, discipline, and forward-thinking values. By embracing CGM as part of the cultural trend towards proactive health measures, the stigma around wearable monitoring is eroding, replaced by enthusiasm for biofeedback, individualized care, and accessible metabolic insights for everyone. This transformation suggests that “flexing health”, once seen as vanity can now foster positive motivation, community, and informed engagement with lifelong wellness [54].

Challenges and Opportunities

Despite its transformative potential in metabolic health, the widespread adoption of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) faces several key challenges that must be addressed to ensure equitable, reliable, and impactful integration into both clinical practice and everyday wellness routines. Accuracy remains an ongoing concerns, as physiological lags between blood and interstitial glucose, sensor calibration errors, and interference from external substances can introduce variability into CGM readings. While technological advances have reduced the mean absolute relative difference (MARD) to below 10% in most modern systems, transient discrepancies, especially during rapid glycemic shifts still exist and underscore the need for transparent algorithms and robust validation across diverse populations. Usability barriers, such as sensor adhesion issues, skin irritation, device cost, and technical complexity, can deter sustained use and limit the reach of CGM technology beyond motivated or affluent users. Furthermore, gaps persist in public understanding of CGM data interpretation and biometrics-driven decision-making. Many individuals remain unaware of key metrics, such as glycemic variability, time in range, and coefficient of variation while misconceptions persist about what constitutes “normal” or “optimal” glucose patterns for health [13,38].

Looking forward, the opportunities for CGM are both profound and rapidly evolving. Expanding access, lower-cost devices, improved insurance coverage, and integration into primary care can democratize metabolic transparency and preventive interventions for broader populations, including underserved and at-risk communities. Advances in biosensor technology, multiomics data collection, and wearable integration are poised to further improve accuracy, reduce technical barriers, and facilitate long-term adherence. Personalization will be accelerated by artificial intelligence machine learning, and smart algorithms capable of cross-referencing CGM data with individual genetics, microbiome profiles, activity trackers, sleep sensors, and nutritional logs to recommend tailored, actionable strategies for metabolic optimization. Future research is expanding to encompass not only glycemic endpoints, but also links to cardiovascular health, cognition, longevity, and digital behaviour modification broadening the clinical and public health relevance of CGM beyond its traditional diabetes remit. Ultimately, efforts to enhance public education, address usability and accuracy limits, and expand access will define the next chapter of CGM as a universally accessible platform for personalized prevention and population health transformation [30,54].

Conclusion

In summary, CGM has evolved from a specialty tool for diabetes management into a versatile platform that empowers proactive metabolic health for all. By delivering real time, actionable glucose data, CGM enables individuals to optimize nutrition, exercise, stress, and sleep in alignment with their unique physiology. This democratization of glucose monitoring, driven by advances in sensor accuracy, user friendly devices, and AI powered personalized insights transforms health care from a reactive paradigm to one of prevention and lifelong wellness.

Importantly, CGM is helping break down the stigma historically associated with glucose monitoring, reframing its use as a symbol of discipline, awareness, and commitment to health. The rise of the “flexing health” movement illustrates how wearable biosensors have become aspirational markers of a proactive lifestyle, celebrated on social media and within fitness communities.

CGM is not without challenges. Ongoing barriers include maintaining high accuracy during rapid glycemic shifts, improving device usability, addressing costs, and advancing public understanding of glycemic metrics. Addressing these concerns while expanding access through innovation, insurance coverage, and primary care adoption will be essential to realize CGM’s full potential.

Looking forward, CGM offers powerful opportunities for personalization, early detection of metabolic dysfunction, chronic disease prevention, and population health impact. As technology, research, and public education continue to advance, CGM is poised to become a cornerstone of digital age preventive medicine, empowering individuals and communities to take control of their metabolic wellness across the lifespan.

Reference

  1. Dungan K, Verma N. Monitoring Technologies – Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Mobile Technology, Biomarkers of Glycemic Control [Internet]. Nih.gov. MDText.com, Inc.; 2023. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK279046/
  2. Cleveland Clinic. Continuous Glucose Monitor (CGM) [Internet]. Cleveland Clinic. Cleveland Clinic; 2024. Available from: https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/continuous-glucose-monitoring-cgm
  3. Vaddiraju S, Burgess DJ, Tomazos I, Jain FC, Papadimitrakopoulos F. Technologies for Continuous Glucose Monitoring: Current Problems and Future Promises. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology. 2010 Nov;4(6):1540–62.
  4. Didyuk O, Econom N, Guardia A, Livingston K, Klueh U. Continuous glucose monitoring devices: Past, present, and future focus on the history and evolution of technological innovation. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology [Internet]. 2020 Jan 13;15(3):193229681989939. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8120065/
  5. Heller A, Feldman B. Electrochemical Glucose Sensors and Their Applications in Diabetes Management. Chemical Reviews. 2008 Jul;108(7):2482–505.
  6. Pullano SA, Greco M, Bianco MG, Foti D, Brunetti A, Fiorillo AS. Glucose biosensors in clinical practice: principles, limits and perspectives of currently used devices. Theranostics [Internet]. 2022 Jan 1;12(2):493–511. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8692922/
  7. Boehm R, Donovan J, Sheth D, Durfor A, Roberts J, Isayeva I. In Vitro Sugar Interference Testing With Amperometric Glucose Oxidase Sensors. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology [Internet]. 2018 Aug 3;13(1):82–95. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6313278/
  8. Cai L, Ge W, Zhu Z, Zhao X, Li Z. Data Analysis and Accuracy Evaluation of a Continuous Glucose-Monitoring Device. Journal of Sensors. 2019 Dec 31;2019:1–8.
  9. Bailey TS, Chang A, Christiansen M. Clinical Accuracy of a Continuous Glucose Monitoring System With an Advanced Algorithm. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology. 2014 Nov 3;9(2):209–14.
  10. Bailey TS. Clinical Implications of Accuracy Measurements of Continuous Glucose Sensors. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics. 2017 May;19(S2):S-51-S-54.
  11. Reiterer F, Polterauer P, Schoemaker M, Schmelzeisen-Redecker G, Freckmann G, Heinemann L, et al. Significance and Reliability of MARD for the Accuracy of CGM Systems. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology. 2016 Sep 25;11(1):59–67.
  12. Hirsch IB. Introduction: History of Glucose Monitoring [Internet]. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. American Diabetes Association; 2018. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK538968/
  13. Schmelzeisen-Redeker G, Schoemaker M, Kirchsteiger H, Freckmann G, Heinemann L, del Re L. Time Delay of CGM Sensors. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology. 2015 Aug 4;9(5):1006–15.
  14. Basu A, Dube S, Slama M, Errazuriz I, Amezcua JC, Kudva YC, et al. Time Lag of Glucose From Intravascular to Interstitial Compartment in Humans. Diabetes. 2013 Sep 5;62(12):4083–7.
  15. Færch K, Amadid H, Bruhn L, Clemmensen KKB, Hulman A, Ried-Larsen M, et al. Discordance Between Glucose Levels Measured in Interstitial Fluid vs in Venous Plasma After Oral Glucose Administration: A Post-Hoc Analysis From the Randomised Controlled PRE-D Trial. Frontiers in Endocrinology [Internet]. 2021 Oct 5;12. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8525890/
  16. Ji C, Jiang T, Liu L, Zhang J, You L. Continuous glucose monitoring combined with artificial intelligence: redefining the pathway for prediabetes management. Frontiers in Endocrinology. 2025 May 26;16.
  17. Veluvali A, Dehghani Zahedani A, Hosseinian A, Aghaeepour N, McLaughlin T, Woodward M, et al. Impact of digital health interventions on glycemic control and weight management. npj Digital Medicine [Internet]. 2025 Jan 9;8(1). Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-025-01430-7
  18. Mahdavi S, Anthony NM, Sikaneta T, Tam PY. Perspective: Multiomics and Artificial Intelligence for Personalized Nutritional Management of Diabetes in Patients Undergoing Peritoneal Dialysis. Advances in Nutrition. 2025 Mar;16(3):100378.
  19. Wang X, Sun Z, Xue H, An R. Artificial Intelligence Applications to Personalized Dietary Recommendations: A Systematic Review. Healthcare [Internet]. 2025 Jun 13;13(12):1417. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9032/13/12/1417
  20. Agrawal K, Goktas P, Kumar N, Leung MF. Artificial intelligence in personalized nutrition and food manufacturing: a comprehensive review of methods, applications, and future directions. Frontiers in Nutrition. 2025 Jul 23;12.
  21. Seo W, Park SW, Kim N, Jin SM, Park SM. A personalized blood glucose level prediction model with a fine-tuning strategy: A proof-of-concept study. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine. 2021 Nov;211:106424.
  22. van Doorn WPTM, Foreman YD, Schaper NC, Savelberg HHCM, Koster A, van der Kallen CJH, et al. Machine learning-based glucose prediction with use of continuous glucose and physical activity monitoring data: The Maastricht Study. PLoS ONE [Internet]. 2021 Jun 24;16(6):e0253125. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8224858/
  23. Singh R, Marouane Toumi, Salathé M. Personalized glucose prediction using in situ data only. Frontiers in Nutrition. 2025 Jun 9;12.
  24. Darpit D, Vyas K, Jagadish Kumaran Jayagopal, Garcia A, Madhav Erraguntla, Lawley M. A personalized federated learning-based glucose prediction algorithm for high-risk glycemic excursion regions in type 1 diabetes. Scientific Reports [Internet]. 2025 Nov 3 [cited 2025 Nov 6];15(1). Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-22316-4
  25. Shomali M, Kumbara A, MacLeod J, Iyer A. Personalized cardiometabolic care powered by artificial intelligence. Frontiers in Endocrinology. 2025 May 23;16.
  26. Arshad MT, Ali MKM, Maqsood S, Ikram A, Ahmed F, Aljameel AI, et al. Personalized Nutrition in the Era of Digital Health: A New Frontier for Managing Diabetes and Obesity. Food Science & Nutrition. 2025 Sep 26;13(10).
  27. Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Non Diabetics: A New Frontier in Metabolic Health Optimization – Vasculearn Network (VLN) [Internet]. Thrombosis.org. 2025 [cited 2025 Nov 6]. Available from: https://thrombosis.org/patients/patient-articles/continuous-glucose-monitoring-for-non-diabetics-a-new-frontier-in-metabolic-health-optimization
  28. Team KR. CGM for Non-Diabetics: Benefits, Uses, and Who Should Try It [Internet]. Koch Clinical Research. 2025 [cited 2025 Nov 6]. Available from: https://kochresearch.com/blogs/cgm-for-non-diabetics/
  29. Chinta Sidharthan. News-Medical [Internet]. News-Medical. 2025. Available from: https://www.news-medical.net/health/Why-Non-Diabetics-Are-Using-Continuous-Glucose-Monitors.aspx
  30. Liu X, Zhang J. Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Transformative Approach to the Detection of Prediabetes. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare [Internet]. 2024 Nov 1;Volume 17:5513–9. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11590642/
  31. Continuous Glucose Monitoring in non-diabetics: a new frontier for personalised health and disease prevention • #1 Continuous Glucose Monitoring App Australia | Vively [Internet]. Vively.co.nz. 2025. Available from: https://www.vively.co.nz/post/continuous-glucose-monitoring-in-non-diabetics
  32. Metwally AA, Perelman D, Park H, Wu Y, Jha A, Sharp S, et al. Prediction of metabolic subphenotypes of type 2 diabetes via continuous glucose monitoring and machine learning. Nature Biomedical Engineering. 2024 Dec 23;
  33. Shibib L, Mo Al-Qaisi, Guess N, Miras AD, Greenwald SE, Pelling M, et al. Manipulation of Post-Prandial Hyperglycaemia in Type 2 Diabetes: An Update for Practitioners. Diabetes Metabolic Syndrome and Obesity. 2024 Aug 1;Volume 17:3111–30.
  34. Bolli GB, Feo PD, Cosmo SD, Perriello G, Ventura MM, Calcinaro F, et al. Demonstration of a Dawn Phenomenon in Normal Human Volunteers. Diabetes. 1984 Dec 1;33(12):1150–3.
  35. O’Neal TB, Luther EE. Dawn Phenomenon [Internet]. Nih.gov. StatPearls Publishing; 2019. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK430893/
  36. Alfieri V, Myasoedova VA, Vinci MC, Rondinelli M, Songia P, Massaiu I, et al. The Role of Glycemic Variability in Cardiovascular Disorders. International Journal of Molecular Sciences [Internet]. 2021 Aug 4 [cited 2022 Jan 13];22(16):8393. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34445099/
  37. Hanssen NMJ, Kraakman MJ, Flynn MC, Nagareddy PR, Schalkwijk CG, Murphy AJ. Postprandial Glucose Spikes, an Important Contributor to Cardiovascular Disease in Diabetes? Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine. 2020 Sep 18;7.
  38. Blaak EE, Antoine JM ., Benton D, Björck I, Bozzetto L, Brouns F, et al. Impact of postprandial glycaemia on health and prevention of disease. Obesity Reviews [Internet]. 2012 Jul 11;13(10):923–84. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3494382/
  39. Shukla AP, Iliescu RG, Thomas CE, Aronne LJ. Food Order Has a Significant Impact on Postprandial Glucose and Insulin Levels: Table 1. Diabetes Care [Internet]. 2015 Jun 23;38(7):e98–9. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4876745/
  40. Goodpaster BH, Sparks LM. Metabolic Flexibility in Health and Disease. Cell Metabolism. 2017 May;25(5):1027–36.
  41. Validate User [Internet]. academic.oup.com. Available from: https://academic.oup.com/edrv/article/39/4/489/4982126?login=false
  42. Smith RL, Soeters MR, Wüst RCI, Houtkooper RH. Metabolic Flexibility as an Adaptation to Energy Resources and Requirements in Health and Disease. Endocrine Reviews. 2018 Apr 24;39(4):489–517.
  43. Spartano NL, Sultana N, Lin H, Cheng H, Lu S, Fei D, et al. Defining continuous glucose monitor time in range in a large community-based cohort without diabetes. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism [Internet]. 2024 Sep 11; Available from: https://academic.oup.com/jcem/advance-article/doi/10.1210/clinem/dgae626/7754867
  44. Tatsuhiko Urakami, Terada H, Tanabe S, Mine Y, Aoki M, Aoki R, et al. Clinical significance of coefficient of variation in continuous glucose monitoring for glycemic management in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Journal of Diabetes Investigation [Internet]. 2024 Sep 4; Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11527802/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
  45. Blaak EE, Antoine JM ., Benton D, Björck I, Bozzetto L, Brouns F, et al. Impact of postprandial glycaemia on health and prevention of disease. Obesity Reviews [Internet]. 2012 Jul 11;13(10):923–84. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3494382/
  46. Clinic C. Time in Range (TIR) for Diabetes: What It Is & Target [Internet]. Cleveland Clinic. 2024. Available from: https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/time-in-range-diabetes
  47. Zhang Z, Wang Y, Lu J, Zhou J. Time in tight range: A key metric for optimal glucose control in the era of advanced diabetes technologies and therapeutics. Diabetes Obesity and Metabolism. 2024 Nov 11;27(2):450–6.
  48. Arshad MT, Ali MKM, Maqsood S, Ikram A, Ahmed F, Aljameel AI, et al. Personalized nutrition in the era of Digital Health: A new frontier for managing diabetes and Obesity [Internet]. U.S. National Library of Medicine; 2025 [cited 2025 Nov 6]. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12474561/
  49. Taylor PJ;Thompson CH;Luscombe-Marsh ND;Wycherley TP;Wittert G;Brinkworth GD; Efficacy of real-time continuous glucose monitoring to improve effects of a prescriptive lifestyle intervention in type 2 diabetes: A pilot study [Internet]. U.S. National Library of Medicine; [cited 2025 Nov 6]. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30706365/
  50. Kim Y-I, Choi Y, Park J. The role of continuous glucose monitoring in physical activity and Nutrition Management: Perspectives on present and possible uses [Internet]. U.S. National Library of Medicine; 2023 [cited 2025 Nov 6]. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10636508/
  51. Taher TMJ, Ahmed HA, Abutiheen AA, Alfadhul SA, Ghazi HF. Stigma perception and determinants among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Iraq [Internet]. U.S. National Library of Medicine; 2023 [cited 2025 Nov 6]. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10684431/
  52. [Internet]. [cited 2025 Nov 6]. Available from: https://diabetesjournals.org/clinical/article/35/1/27/35423/Stigma-in-People-With-Type-1-or-Type-2-Diabetes
  53. Marrero DG, III JRG. Reducing health disparities and inequities in the prescription and adoption of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology in underserved populations [Internet]. JSciMed Central; 1970 [cited 2025 Nov 6]. Available from: https://www.jscimedcentral.com/jounal-article-info/Annals-of-Vascular-Medicine-and-Research/Reducing-Health-Disparities-and-Inequities-in-the-Prescription-and-Adoption-of-Continuous-Glucose-Monitoring-(CGM)-Technology-in-Underserved-Populations-11101
  54. Tyagi S, Sng K, Ng DWL, Teo VHY, Thio SM, He JCE, et al. Implementing continuous glucose monitoring in public primary care for type 2 diabetes management: A convergent mixed-methods study of patient and provider experiences in Singapore [Internet]. U.S. National Library of Medicine; 2025 [cited 2025 Nov 6]. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12577197/
  55. Luijf YM, Mader JK, Doll W, Pieber T, Farret A, Place J, et al. Accuracy and reliability of continuous glucose monitoring systems: A head-to-head comparison [Internet]. U.S. National Library of Medicine; 2013 [cited 2025 Nov 6]. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3746288/
  56. Gajda I, Greenman J, Santoro C, Serov A, Atanassov P, Melhuish C, et al. Multi-functional microbial fuel cells for power, treatment and electro-osmotic purification of urine [Internet]. U.S. National Library of Medicine; 2019 [cited 2025 Nov 6]. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6686702/