Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 50 references

A personalized model and optimization strategy for estimating blood glucose concentrations from sweat measurements

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A three-compartment model plus double-loop optimization recovers blood glucose from sweat measurements with a reported Pearson correlation of 0.98, far above the 0.75 ceiling of linear methods.

desk verdict The forward model is a real contribution, but the headline inverse-problem result is an in-sample fit with no identifiability support. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.02870 v1 pith:XPP5K37F submitted 2024-12-03 q-bio.QM

Xiaoyu Yin , Elisabetta Peri , Eduard Pelssers , Jaap den Toonder , Lisa Klous , Hein Daanen , Massimo Mischi This is my paper · ORCID
classification q-bio.QM
keywords sweatsensingdiabetespatientmonitoringpharmacokineticmodelingbloodglucoseinverseproblempersonalizedoptimizationnon-invasive
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Diabetes care depends on frequent blood glucose measurement, and sweat would be a painless source of that signal if the relation between sweat and blood glucose were reliable. This paper claims that linear correlation, the current standard, is the wrong tool, and substitutes a three-compartment pharmacokinetic model of glucose transport from blood to sweat. On top of the model, it runs a double-loop optimization: one loop estimates the unknown blood glucose, and the second tunes the model's most sensitive parameters to each person. The authors report that this inverse strategy recovers blood glucose from 108 sweat samples with a Pearson correlation of 0.98 and an average root-mean-square percentage error of 12% ± 8%, far above the best linear coefficient (0.75) previously reported. If the claim holds, non-invasive sweat monitoring becomes a realistic route toward semi-continuous glucose tracking.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the double-loop optimization built on a three-compartment glucose transport model. The model traces glucose from blood capillaries into interstitial fluid and then into the sweat gland by diffusion and convection, with an extra dilution term that divides the gland glucose by a factor depending on the water-to-glucose flow ratio and normalized sweat velocity. The double loop alternates a blood-glucose update (Loop 1) with a personalized update of the four most sensitive parameters (Loop 2), using a sparse nonlinear optimizer, until the sweat-glucose error falls below the paper's threshold. This mechanism is what turns a forward physiological model into an inverse estimator of blood glucose.

What would settle it

Run the double-loop optimizer on synthetic data with known true blood glucose, feeding it a deliberately wrong blood glucose trajectory that still reproduces the measured sweat glucose after parameter tuning. If the optimizer hits the error threshold while reporting the wrong blood glucose, sweat alone does not identify blood glucose and the 0.98 correlation would not establish a unique recovery. A direct check is to hold out the second half of each subject's time series during parameter fitting and test the fitted model on the held-out points; a large error jump would mean the personalized fit is memorizing the training points rather than capturing physiology.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The discovery is that the blood-to-sweat glucose relationship can be modeled forward as passive transport through blood capillary, interstitial fluid, and sweat gland compartments, and that the reverse direction—estimating blood glucose from sweat—can be solved numerically by alternating two optimizations. Loop 1 adjusts the unknown blood glucose concentration to minimize the squared error between model-predicted and measured sweat glucose (Eq. 11). Loop 2 adjusts the four parameters with sensitivity above 1% (the water-to-glucose flow ratio, glucose diffusivity in sweat, glucose diffusivity through the sweat-gland wall, and gland-wall thickness), personalizing the model to each subject. The loops alternate until the sweat error falls below the convergence threshold set in the paper, and each data point is estimated from a sliding three-point window and averaged. Across all 108 points from seven datasets, the double-loop method reaches $R=0.98$ and a root-mean-square percentage error of 12% ± 8%, compared with $R=0.96$ for single-loop fixed-parameter optimization, while the forward model alone matches sweat glucose with $R=0.99$ versus 0.96 for the only previous model.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that, after the second loop tunes the four model parameters, a small error between predicted and measured sweat glucose can only be produced by the correct blood glucose value; the paper does not check whether other blood-glucose-and-parameter combinations could produce the same sweat signal.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A sweat patch that reports blood glucose instead of raw sweat glucose becomes plausible, provided the same per-person calibration can be done with a small number of fingersticks.
  • The 0.98 versus 0.75 gap suggests that linear regression, not sensor quality, was the limiting factor in earlier sweat-glucose studies.
  • The model's approximately six-minute transport delay means a semi-continuous monitor could track glucose swings with a short lag, close to the physiological lag seen in the earlier literature.
  • Because the personalized parameter values stay within physiological ranges, the optimization produces interpretable, subject-specific physiology rather than an arbitrary curve fit.
  • The inverse strategy could be extended to other sweat biomarkers, such as cortisol and lactate, by replacing the transport model while keeping the same double-loop estimation framework.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper, the reported 0.98 correlation is likely optimistic because the same 108 points were used both to fit personalized parameters and to report accuracy; an out-of-sample test on unseen subjects would give a fairer estimate.
  • Beyond the paper, the double loop fits four parameters at the same time it estimates blood glucose, so the inverse problem may not be unique; an identifiability analysis or regularization would show whether many parameter-and-glucose combinations could produce the same sweat signal.
  • Beyond the paper, the method depends on reliable simultaneous sweat-rate measurements, since the dilution term is central to the model; noisy sweat-rate readings could bias the blood glucose estimate or be absorbed by the fitted parameters.
  • Beyond the paper, a controlled synthetic test—feeding the optimizer a known wrong blood glucose trajectory that still reproduces the sweat data after parameter tuning—would directly reveal whether sweat alone can identify blood glucose.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a compartmental pharmacokinetic model of glucose transport from blood to sweat, incorporating a dilution term that depends on sweat rate, and a double-loop optimization strategy to estimate blood glucose concentrations from measured sweat glucose. The forward model is compared with La Count et al.'s model on seven datasets totaling 108 measurement points, and the inverse strategy is evaluated by comparing estimated blood glucose with measured blood glucose, reporting Pearson R=0.96 for single-loop and R=0.98 for double-loop optimization, with RMSPE 15%±8% and 12%±8%, respectively. The authors claim this significantly outperforms previously reported sweat-blood glucose correlations.

Significance. If the reported inverse estimation accuracy were validated, the work would be a meaningful step toward non-invasive glucose monitoring. The forward model's inclusion of sweat-rate-dependent dilution and its reduced parameter count relative to La Count et al.'s model are plausible improvements, and the sensitivity analysis usefully identifies the most influential parameters. The single-loop result with fixed literature parameters provides some non-circular grounding. However, the headline double-loop result is an in-sample fit, and the identifiability of the inverse problem is not established; these issues currently limit the support for the central claim of having 'effectively solved' the inverse problem.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2.3.2 / Eq. (11)] The reported double-loop performance (R=0.98, RMSPE 12%±8%) is obtained by fitting four per-experiment parameters (Table 4) to minimize the same sweat-glucose error defined by Eq. (11) that is used as the stopping criterion for the blood-glucose estimates; no data are held out, and no cross-validation, bootstrap, or uncertainty intervals on R are reported. The R and RMSPE therefore quantify in-sample fit rather than predictive accuracy, and the Abstract's claim that the strategy 'effectively solved the inverse problem' overstates what the evaluation supports.
  2. [Section 2.3.2] The statement that reaching the error threshold 'indicates that the input estimated glucose concentration in blood accurately reflects the actual blood glucose concentration' assumes that minimizing the sweat-glucose error identifies the true blood glucose concentration uniquely. This injectivity is not demonstrated and is doubtful given structural degeneracies: Eq. (5) depends on D_sg,wall/h_sg as a ratio, and Eq. (10) depends on K_w/g multiplied by the normalized sweat velocity, so parameter compensation can mimic a wrong blood glucose trajectory. A noise-perturbation study, a profile-likelihood analysis, or an out-of-sample test is needed before accepting the identifiability claim.
  3. [Section 2.2.2 / Table 1] For datasets 6 and 7, single measurements per condition are treated as time-constant glucose concentrations; these datasets contribute 56 of the 108 points (48 in Exp 7 and 8 in Exp 6). This ad hoc assumption is load-bearing for the aggregated correlation and error metrics, and the paper provides no sensitivity analysis to assess how violations of the constancy assumption would affect the reported R and RMSPE.
  4. [Abstract / Section 4.2] The comparison with the best literature correlation (0.75) is not apples-to-apples: the 0.75 values are correlations between measured sweat glucose and measured blood glucose obtained by linear regression, whereas the 0.98 reported here is the correlation between model-estimated blood glucose and measured blood glucose after fitting personalized parameters. The claim of outperformance should be rephrased to acknowledge that the evaluation protocols differ.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table 4] The paper reports personalized parameter values but does not specify the bounds, tolerances, or stopping criteria used by the 'sparse nonlinear optimizer'; adding these details would improve reproducibility.
  2. [Section 2.3.2] The sliding-window averaging (three points, step one) is described, but its effect on the reported metrics is not quantified; a comparison with single-point estimates would clarify the contribution of temporal smoothing.
  3. [Section 3.2 / Fig. 7] The Wilcoxon signed-rank tests treat the 108 measurement points as independent, although the points are clustered within experiments and subjects; a mixed-effects model or a per-dataset summary would be more appropriate for the claim of statistically significant improvement.
  4. [Section 3.1] The text reports average RMSE and RMSPE across the seven studies without stating that the averages are unweighted; a weighted average or per-study details would aid interpretation.
  5. [Section 2.2.3] The sensitivity analysis uses a Gaussian perturbation with a 10% standard deviation without justification; this choice affects which parameters pass the CV>1% threshold and thus which parameters are optimized in Loop 2.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Partial circularity: the double-loop 'personalized' blood-glucose estimates are obtained by fitting per-experiment parameters to the same sweat-glucose error used for evaluation, so the R=0.98 headline is an in-sample fit; the single-loop R=0.96 provides independent support.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 2.3.2 (Optimization Process), Section 3.2; Eq. (11); Table 4]
    "This process of alternating single iterations between the first and second loops continues until the error, e_i, as defined in (11), is reduced to less than 0.001 mmol^2 L^-2. Once this error threshold is met, the estimated glucose concentration in sweat closely aligns with the measured concentration, indicating that the input estimated glucose concentration in blood accurately reflects the actual blood glucose concentration."

    Loop 2 fits four per-experiment parameters (D_sg,wall, D_sw, K_w/g, h_sg; Table 4) by minimizing the same sweat-glucose error e_i (Eq. 11) that Loop 1 minimizes to estimate blood glucose. The stopping rule and the asserted marker of blood accuracy are therefore the same sweat-error objective. Because the four fitted parameters can absorb model mismatch, the condition e_i < 0.001 does not by itself identify the blood glucose value; the paper provides no identifiability, noise-perturbation, or held-out validation. The reported R=0.98 is thus an in-sample fit of both parameters and blood estimates to the same 108 sweat measurements, not an independent prediction of blood glucose.

full rationale

The forward transport model (Section 2.2) is evaluated against external blood-to-sweat data with fixed literature parameters, so that part is not circular. The single-loop inverse optimization (fixed parameters) also provides an independent check: R=0.96 against measured blood glucose. The circularity concern is confined to the double-loop strategy. In Loop 2, four sensitive parameters are optimized per experiment using exactly the same sweat-glucose error (Eq. 11) that Loop 1 uses to estimate blood glucose; the stopping threshold on that error is then interpreted as proof that the estimated blood glucose is accurate (Section 2.3.2). With four free parameters per experiment, the sweat error can be driven down for a range of blood-glucose values, so the R=0.98 headline is an in-sample consistency fit rather than an out-of-sample prediction. The paper does not report identifiability analysis, noise perturbation, or split-half validation to show that the sweat-to-blood mapping is unique after personalization. This is a partial circularity/fitted-input-called-prediction issue, not a fully tautological derivation. The self-citation to the authors' preliminary work [25] is not load-bearing; the present paper contains the model and methods. No other circular steps were found.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model uses 18 literature-derived parameters; four of these are fitted per experiment in Loop 2, making them free parameters that directly influence the headline accuracy. The inverse result also assumes that minimizing sweat-glucose error identifies true blood glucose, which is an unproved identifiability assumption. Standard transport laws underpin the forward model. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (7)
  • D_sg,wall (diffusion coefficient for sweat gland wall) = 1.30e-9 (Diabetic 1, Exp 3), 4.76e-10 (Diabetic 2, Exp 6); healthy range (5.93-8.62)e-10
    Fitted per experiment in Loop 2 to minimize sweat-glucose error; initial value 6.46e-10 from literature.
  • D_sw (diffusion coefficient of glucose in sweat) = 3.79e-10 (Diabetic 1, Exp 3), 7.82e-10 (Diabetic 2, Exp 6); healthy range (5.66-7.64)e-10
    Fitted per experiment in Loop 2; initial value 6.7e-10.
  • K_w/g (ratio of volumetric flow rate of water to glucose) = 10.40 (Diabetic 1), 12.82 (Diabetic 2); healthy range 10.04-13.36
    Fitted per experiment; initial value 12. Sensitivity analysis shows it has the largest CV (18.2%) and thus the strongest influence.
  • h_sg (thickness of sweat gland wall) = 2.60e-5 (Diabetic 1), 6.67e-5 (Diabetic 2); healthy range (3.45-6.64)e-5
    Fitted per experiment in Loop 2; initial value 5e-5.
  • Initial blood glucose estimate = 5.5 mmol/L
    Chosen from population average [47] as the optimization start; updated by Loop 1, so it is not a final model parameter but affects the convergence path.
  • Convergence threshold for error = 0.001 mmol^2/L^2
    Stopping criterion for the double loop; chosen by hand and not varied in sensitivity analysis.
  • Sliding window length = 3 data points
    Each point is estimated three times and averaged; chosen by hand, affects variance and temporal resolution.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Glucose transport from blood to sweat follows passive diffusion and convection as described by Eqs. (1)-(10), with no active transport or reabsorption in the sweat gland.
    Central modeling premise; the model compartments and fluxes in Section 2.2 assume this. If active transport or reabsorption is significant, the inverse estimates could be biased.
  • domain assumption Transport across the sweat gland wall is diffusion-dominated; convection is negligible (Section 2.2.1, after Eq. 5).
    This simplification is cited to [36] and is load-bearing for Eq. (5).
  • domain assumption Capillary walls are completely permeable to water and colloid osmotic pressure is neglected (Section 2.2.1).
    Used to derive water flow in Eq. (2) from Starling's equation.
  • domain assumption The ISF compartment follows a Krogh cylinder geometry with dimensions from [29] (Section 2.2.1).
    Determines volumes and areas in Eqs. (1)-(4).
  • domain assumption All 18 biophysical parameters in Table 2 are accurate for all subjects except the four optimized in Loop 2.
    The model relies on literature-derived population averages; inter-individual variation in the remaining 14 parameters is not accounted for.
  • ad hoc to paper Single measurements per condition in datasets 6 and 7 are treated as constant glucose concentrations over time (Section 2.2.2).
    This data-handling assumption is introduced specifically for this study; temporal variation is ignored.
  • ad hoc to paper Minimizing the sweat-glucose error (Eq. 11) identifies the true blood glucose concentration uniquely (Section 2.3.2).
    This identifiability assumption is asserted, not proved; with four parameters also being optimized, the inverse solution may not be unique or stable.
  • standard math Fick's law, Starling's equation, and Darcy's law apply at the scale and conditions of a single sweat gland.
    Underlying physical laws used in Eqs. (2), (5), (6), and (9); treated as standard background.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A personalized model and optimization strategy for estimating blood glucose concentrations from sweat measurements." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XPP5K37F

@misc{pith2026241202870,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A personalized model and optimization strategy for estimating blood glucose concentrations from sweat measurements},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XPP5K37F}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.02870}
}
read the original abstract

Background and objective: Diabetes is one of the four leading causes of death worldwide, necessitating daily blood glucose monitoring. While sweat offers a promising non-invasive alternative for glucose monitoring, its application remains limited due to the low to moderate correlation between sweat and blood glucose concentrations, which has been obtained until now by assuming a linear relationship. This study proposes a novel model-based strategy to estimate blood glucose concentrations from sweat samples, setting the stage for non-invasive glucose monitoring through sweat-sensing technology. Methods: We first developed a pharmacokinetic glucose transport model that describes the glucose transport from blood to sweat. Secondly, we designed a novel optimization strategy leveraging the proposed model to solve the inverse problem and infer blood glucose levels from measured glucose concentrations in sweat. To this end, the pharmacokinetic model parameters with the highest sensitivity were also optimized so as to achieve a personalized estimation. Our strategy was tested on a dataset composed of 108 samples from healthy volunteers and diabetic patients. Results: Our glucose transport model improves over the state-of-the-art in estimating sweat glucose concentrations from blood levels (higher accuracy, p<0.001). Additionally, our optimization strategy effectively solved the inverse problem, yielding a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.98 across all 108 data points, with an average root-mean-square-percent-error of 12%+/-8%. This significantly outperforms the best sweat-blood glucose correlation reported in the existing literature (0.75). Conclusion: Our innovative optimization strategy, also leveraging more accurate modeling, shows promising results, paving the way for non-invasive blood glucose monitoring and, possibly, improved diabetes management.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.02870 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Schematic of the glucose transport process from blood to sweat along a single sweat gland. (b) Compartment model and corresponding formulas. is the dermal clearance constant of glucose in 𝑠 −1 [28], representing the rate at which glucose is drawn from the capillaries to the ISF, and 𝑉𝑝 represents the effective volume of the blood capillary compartment in 𝑚3 . The blood capillary compartment is modeled as a cylin… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Flowchart of the double-loop optimization strategy. The intertwined optimization loops iteratively refining the estimated blood glucose concentrations (Loop 1) and the parameters of the glucose transport model (Loop 2), with the latter achieving a patient-specific approach. estimation performance of the model. By optimizing parameters with larger CVs, unnecessary computations were avoided, thereby improving the mode… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Temporal dynamics of the glucose transport model to changes in glucose concentrations: (a) input blood glucose concentrations induced by a step function and (b) output sweat glucose concentration, with the dashed line indicating the time to steady states [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Comparison of measured and estimated sweat glucose concentrations using our glucose transport model for the whole 108 experimental data points, where circles represent healthy subjects and outlined diamonds represent diabetic patients. See [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Boxplot comparison of direct estimation performance by the glucose transport model: (a) absolute error and (b) absolute percentage error across all 108 experimental data points from the seven datasets. Asterisks denote statistical significance, ‘***’ denotes statistica…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) Comparison of estimated blood glucose concentrations using the single-loop (represented in gray) and double-loop (represented in green) algorithms. Experimental data are represented by blue points, sourced from [26]. (b) Evaluation of performance for single- and do…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Boxplot comparison of inverse estimation performance of single-loop versus double-loop optimizations: (a) absolute error and (b) absolute percentage error across all 108 experimental data points from the seven datasets. Asterisks denote statistical significance, with ‘…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of estimated and measured blood glucose concentrations using double-loop optimization for the whole 108 experimental data points (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bloom, S

    D. Bloom, S. Chen, M. McGovern, La carga económica de las enfermedades no transmisibles y la enfermedad mental: Resultados para costa rica, jamaica y perú, Revista Panamericana de Salud Pública 42 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.114747

    work page arXiv 2018

  2. [2]

    D.Magliano,E.J.Boyko, 10thedition.brussels:Internationaldiabetesfederation, IDFdiabetesatlas(2021).https://diabetesatlas.org/idfawp/ resource-files/2021/07/IDF_Atlas_10th_Edition_2021.pdf

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2019.107843

    P.Saeedi,I.Petersohn,P.Salpea,B.Malanda,S.Karuranga,etal., Globalandregionaldiabetesprevalenceestimatesfor2019andprojections for2030and2045:Resultsfromtheinternationaldiabetesfederationdiabetesatlas, Diabetesresearchandclinicalpractice157(2019)107843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2019.107843

    work page arXiv 2019

  4. [4]

    Hermanns, D.Ehrmann, A

    N. Hermanns, D.Ehrmann, A. Shapira, B. Kulzer, A.Schmitt, L. Laffel, Coordination ofglucose monitoring, self-care behaviour and mental health: achieving precision monitoring in diabetes, Diabetologia 65 (2022) 1883–1894. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-022-05685-7

    work page doi:10.1007/s00125-022-05685-7 2022

  5. [5]

    Grant, T

    R. Grant, T. Donner, J. Fradkin, C. Hayes, et al., Standards of medical care in diabetes—2015, Diabetes care 38 (2015) S1–94. https: //doi.org/10.2337/dc15-S003

    work page doi:10.2337/dc15-s003 2015

  6. [6]

    M. S. Hoffman, J. W. McKeage, J. Xu, B. P. Ruddy, P. M. Nielsen, A. J. Taberner, Minimally invasive capillary blood sampling methods, Expert review of medical devices 20 (2023) 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17434440.2023.2170783

    arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    H. Lu, S. Zada, L. Yang, et al., Microneedle-based device for biological analysis, Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 10 (2022) 851134. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.851134

    work page arXiv 2022

  8. [8]

    Leelarathna, M

    L. Leelarathna, M. L. Evans, S. Neupane, G. Rayman, et al., Intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring for type 1 diabetes, N Engl J Med 387 (2022) 1477–1487. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2205650. Page 14 of 16

    work page doi:10.1056/nejmoa2205650 2022

Show all 50 references
  1. [9]

    A.N.L.Hermans,R.M.J.VanDerVelden,M.e.a.Gawalko, On-demandmobilehealthinfrastructurestoallowcomprehensiveremoteatrial fibrillationandriskfactormanagementthroughteleconsultation,ClinicalCardiology43(2020)1232–1239.https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.23469

    2020 doi

  2. [10]

    https://doi.org/10.1002/VIW.20200077

    E.J.Moonen,J.R.Haakma,E.Peri,etal., Wearablesweatsensingforprolonged,semicontinuous,andnonobtrusivehealthmonitoring, View 1 (2020) 20200077. https://doi.org/10.1002/VIW.20200077

    2020 doi

  3. [11]

    B. J. Van Enter, E. Von Hauff, Challenges and perspectives in continuous glucose monitoring, Chemical Communications 54 (2018) 5032–

    2018

  4. [12]

    Davis, J

    N. Davis, J. Heikenfeld, C. Milla, A. Javey, The challenges and promise of sweat sensing, Nature Biotechnology (2024). https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41587-023-02059-1

    2024

  5. [13]

    Moyer, D

    J. Moyer, D. Wilson, I. Finkelshtein, B. Wong, R. Potts, Correlation between sweat glucose and blood glucose in subjects with diabetes, Diabetes technology and therapeutics 14 (2012) 398–402. https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2011.0262

    2012

  6. [14]

    Klous, C

    L. Klous, C. De Ruiter, S. Scherrer, N. Gerrett, H. Daanen, The (in)dependency of blood and sweat sodium, chloride, potassium, ammonia, lactate and glucose concentrations during submaximal exercise, Eur J Appl Physiol 121 (2021) 803–816. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00421-020-04562-8

    2021

  7. [15]

    H. Y. Y. Nyein, M. Bariya, L. Kivimäki, et al., Regional and correlative sweat analysis using high-throughput microfluidic sensing patches toward decoding sweat, Sci. Adv. 5 (2019) eaaw9906. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaw9906

    2019 doi

  8. [16]

    E. V. Karpova, E. V. Shcherbacheva, A. A. Galushin, et al., Noninvasive diabetes monitoring through continuous analysis of sweat using flow-through glucose biosensor, Anal. Chem. 91 (2019) 3778–3783. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.analchem.8b05928

    2019 doi

  9. [17]

    Nano Mater

    M.M.Mwaurah,R.Vinoth,T.Nakagawa,etal., Aneckband-integratedsoftmicrofluidicbiosensorforsweatglucosemonitoring, ACSAppl. Nano Mater. 7 (2024) 17017–17028. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsanm.4c03164

    2024 doi

  10. [18]

    J. R. Sempionatto, J.-M. Moon, J. Wang, Touch-based fingertip blood-free reliable glucose monitoring: Personalized data processing for predicting blood glucose concentrations, ACS Sens. 6 (2021) 1875–1883. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acssensors.1c00139

    2021 doi

  11. [19]

    T. D. La Count, A. Jajack, J. Heikenfeld, G. B. Kasting, Modeling glucose transport from systemic circulation to sweat, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences 108 (2019) 364–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xphs.2018.09.026

    2019 doi

  12. [20]

    https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2020.575789

    A.Mari,A.Tura,E.Grespan,R.Bizzotto, Mathematicalmodelingforthephysiologicalandclinicalinvestigationofglucosehomeostasisand diabetes, Frontiers in Physiology 11 (2020) 575789. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2020.575789

    2020

  13. [21]

    Longo, L

    N. Longo, L. D. Griffin, R. C. Shuster, S. Langley, L. J. Elsas, Increased glucose transport by human fibroblasts with a heritable defect in insulin binding, Metabolism 38 (1989) 690–697. https://doi.org/10.1016/0026-0495(89)90109-1

    1989 doi

  14. [22]

    https://doi.org/10.2337/db05-1692

    R.Basu,C.DallaMan,M.Campioni,etal., Effectsofageandsexonpostprandialglucosemetabolism:differencesinglucoseturnover,insulin secretion, insulin action, and hepatic insulin extraction, Diabetes 55 (2006) 2001–2014. https://doi.org/10.2337/db05-1692

    2006 doi

  15. [23]

    Mendes-Soares, T

    H. Mendes-Soares, T. Raveh-Sadka, S. Azulay, K. Edens, et al., Assessment of a personalized approach to predicting postprandial glycemic responses to food among individuals without diabetes, JAMA network open 2 (2019) e188102–e188102. https://doi.org/10.1001/ jamanetworkopen.2018.8102

    2019

  16. [24]

    Zenker, J

    S. Zenker, J. Rubin, G. Clermont, From inverse problems in mathematical physiology to quantitative differential diagnoses, PLoS computational biology 3 (2007) e204. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030204

    2007 doi

  17. [25]

    https://doi.org/10.1109/MeMeA57477

    X.Yin,E.Peri,E.Pelssers,etal.,Estimationofbloodglucoselevelsbysweatsensingbasedonbiophysicalmodelingofglucosetransport,2023 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA) (2023) 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/MeMeA57477. 2023.10171952

    2023

  18. [26]

    H. Lee, T. K. Choi, Y. B. Lee, Cho, et al., A graphene-based electrochemical device with thermoresponsive microneedles for diabetes monitoring and therapy, Nature nanotechnology 11 (2016) 566–572. https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2016.38

    2016 doi

  19. [27]

    T. C. Boysen, S. Yanagawa, F. Sato, K. Sato, A modified anaerobic method of sweat collection, Journal of Applied Physiology 56 (1984) 1302–1307. https://doi.org/10.1152/jappl.1984.56.5.1302

    1984 doi

  20. [28]

    https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.23106

    R.Ibrahim,J.M.Nitsche,G.B.Kasting, Dermalclearancemodelforepidermalbioavailabilitycalculations, ReviewsinChemicalEngineering 101 (2012) 2094–2108. https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.23106

    2012 doi

  21. [29]

    Himeno, et al., Mechanisms underlying the volume regulation of interstitial fluid by capillaries: a simulation study, Integrative Medicine Research 5 (2016) 11–21

    Y. Himeno, et al., Mechanisms underlying the volume regulation of interstitial fluid by capillaries: a simulation study, Integrative Medicine Research 5 (2016) 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imr.2015.12.006

    2016 doi

  22. [30]

    Wilke, A

    K. Wilke, A. Martin, L. Terstegen, S. S. Biel, A short history of sweat gland biology, Intern J of Cosmetic Sci 29 (2007) 169–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2494.2007.00387.x

    2007

  23. [31]

    M. R. Kellen, J. B. Bassingthwaighte, Transient transcapillary exchange of water driven by osmotic forces in the heart, American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology 285 (2003) H1317–H1331. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpheart.00587.2002

    2003

  24. [32]

    Haggerty, M

    A. Haggerty, M. Nirmalan, Capillary dynamics, interstitial fluid and the lymphatic system, Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine 20 (2019) 182–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mpaic.2012.11.016

    2019 doi

  25. [33]

    Rippe, B

    B. Rippe, B. Haraldsson, Capillary permeability in rat hindquarters as determined by estimations of capillary reflection coefficients, Acta Physiologica Scandinavica 127 (1986) 289–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-1716.1986.tb07908.x

    1986

  26. [34]

    Longo, L

    N. Longo, L. D. Griffin, S. D. Langley, L. J. Elsas, Glucose transport by cultured human fibroblasts: regulation by phorbol esters and insulin, Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)-Biomembranes 1104 (1992) 24–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-2736(92)90127-8

    1992 doi

  27. [35]

    Khalil, K

    E. Khalil, K. Kretsos, G. B. Kasting, Glucose partition coefficient and diffusivity in the lower skin layers, Pharm Res 23 (2006) 1227–1234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11095-006-0141-9

    2006 doi

  28. [36]

    P. S. Lavery, C. E. Oldham, M. Ghisalberti, The use of fick’s first law for predicting porewater nutrient fluxes under diffusive conditions, Hydrological Processes 15 (2018) 2435–2451. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.297

    2018 doi

  29. [37]

    Zhang, H

    T. Zhang, H. Fang, Effective diffusion coefficients of glucose in artificial biofilms, Environmental technology 26 (2005) 155–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593332608618574

    2005 doi

  30. [38]

    Sonner, E

    Z. Sonner, E. Wilder, J. Heikenfeld, et al., The microfluidics of the eccrine sweat gland, including biomarker partitioning, transport, and biosensing implications, Biomicrofluidics 9 (2015) 031301. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4921039. Page 15 of 16

    2015 doi

  31. [39]

    Aronson, The interstitial compartment as a therapeutic target in heart failure, Front

    D. Aronson, The interstitial compartment as a therapeutic target in heart failure, Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 9 (2022) 933384. https: //doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.933384

    2022

  32. [40]

    I. J. Schulz, Micropuncture studies of the sweat formation in cystic fibrosis patients, J. Clin. Invest 48 (1969) 1470–1477. https://doi.org/10. 1172/JCI106113

    1969

  33. [41]

    Kestin, M

    J. Kestin, M. Sokolov, W. A. Wakeham, Viscosity of liquid water in the range−5 to 150◦c, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 7 (1978) 941–948. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.555581

    1978 doi

  34. [42]

    R. G. Hibbs, The fine structure of human eccrine sweat glands, Am. J. Anat. 103 (1958) 201–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/aja.1001030204

    1958 doi

  35. [43]

    C. Li, N. Wang, Y. Yao, Z. Cui, J. Gao, D. Feng, Density, dynamic viscosity, conductivity and refractive index for mixture d-glucose and deep eutectic solvent (choline chloride+ urea) at different temperatures, Physics and Chemistry of Liquids 60 (2022) 83–94. https: //doi.org...

    2022

  36. [44]

    S. Nie, C. Zhang, J. Song, Thermal management of epidermal electronic devices/skin system considering insensible sweating, Sci Rep 8 (2018) 14121. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-32152-4

    2018 doi

  37. [45]

    Taraji, P

    M. Taraji, P. R. Haddad, R. I. Amos, M. Talebi, R. Szucs, Error measures in quantitative structure-retention relationships studies, Journal of Chromatography A 1524 (2017) 298–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2017.09.050

    2017 doi

  38. [46]

    Krishnamoorthy, M

    K. Krishnamoorthy, M. Lee, Improved tests for the equality of normal coefficients of variation, Comput Stat 29 (2024) 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00180-013-0445-2

    2024 doi

  39. [47]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60679-X

    G.Danaei,M.M.Finucane,Y.Lu,G.M.Singh,etal., National,regional,andglobaltrendsinfastingplasmaglucoseanddiabetesprevalence since1980:systematicanalysisofhealthexaminationsurveysandepidemiologicalstudieswith370country-yearsand2.7millionparticipants, The lancet 378 (2011) 31–40. h...

    2011 doi

  40. [48]

    P. E. Gill, W. Murray, M. A. Saunders, Snopt: An sqp algorithm for large-scale constrained optimization, SIAM Rev. 47 (2005) 99–131. https://doi.org/10.1137/S1052623499350013

    2005 doi

  41. [49]

    D. Care, 6. glycemic targets: standards of medical care in diabetes—2019, Diabetes Care 42 (2019) S61–70. https://doi.org/10.2337/ dc19-S006. Page 16 of 16

    2019

  42. [5045]

    https://doi.org/10.1039/C8CC01678J

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.