Source author record

Thomas Kronborg

Thomas Kronborg appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

1works
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

1 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Personalized Forecasting of Glycemic Control in Type 1 and 2 Diabetes Using Foundational AI and Machine Learning Models

Background: Accurate week-ahead forecasts of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) derived metrics could enable proactive diabetes management, but relative performance of modern tabular learning approaches is incompletely defined. Methods: We trained and internally validated four regression models (CatBoost, XGBoost, AutoGluon, tabPFN) to predict six weekahead CGM metrics (TIR, TITR, TAR, TBR, CV, MAGE, and related quantiles) using 4,622 case-weeks from two cohorts (T1DM n=3,389; T2DM n=1,233). Performance was assessed with mean absolute error (MAE) and mean absolute relative difference (MARD); quantile classification was summarized via confusion-matrix heatmaps. Results: Across T1DM and T2DM, all models produced broadly comparable performance for most targets. For T1DM, MARD for TIR, TITR, TAR and MAGE ranged 8.5 to 16.5% while TBR showed large MARD (mean ~48%) despite low MAE. AutoGluon and tabPFN showed lower MAE than XGBoost for several targets (e.g., TITR: p<0.01; TAR/TBR: p<0.05 to 0.01). For T2DM MARD ranged 7.8 to 23.9% and TBR relative error was ~78%; tabPFN outperformed other models for TIR (p<0.01), and AutoGluon/ tabPFN outperformed CatBoost/XGBoost on TAR (p<0.05). Inference time per 1,000 cases varied markedly (PFN 699 s; AG 2.7 s; CatBoost 0.04 s, XGBoost 0.04 s). Conclusions: Week-ahead CGM metrics are predictable with reasonable accuracy using modern tabular models, but low-prevalence hypoglycemia remains difficult to predict in relative terms. Advanced AutoML and foundation models yield modest accuracy gains at substantially higher computational cost.