Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices provide real-time actionable data on blood glucose levels, making them essential tools for effective glucose management. Integrating blood glucose data with food log data is crucial for understanding how dietary choices impact glucose levels. Despite their utility, many CGM applications lack integration with other external services, such as food trackers, and do not generate useful glycemic variability (GV) metrics or advanced visualizations. Existing solutions vary in functionality: some are proprietary, many require additional user programming or custom preprocessing to meet diverse research needs, and few have created solutions to connect CGM data with external services. Recent reviews highlight gaps such as insufficient postprandial analytics, absence of composite indices, and inadequate tools for nontechnical users.
Methods:
Glucose360 and commonly used alternative CGM applications and tools were compared by calculating GV metrics on 60 participant datasets and by contrasting their general applications for research workflows.
Results:
To address limitations, we developed Glucose360, featuring (1) an open-source python framework for event-based CGM data integration and analysis; (2) automated calculation of glucose metrics specific for meals and exercise events and other short-interval events; and (3) a user-friendly web application, designed for users with minimal programming experience and accessible at vurhd2.shinyapps.io/glucose360/.
Discussion:
Overall, Glucose360 provides a holistic analysis pipeline that is useful for both individuals and researchers to track and analyze CGM data. The source code for Glucose360 can be found at github.com/vurhd2/Glucose360.
RodbardD. Continuous glucose monitoring: A review of successes, challenges, and opportunities. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2016; 18(Suppl 2):S3–S13; doi: 10.1089/dia.2015.0417
2.
EhrhardtN, Al ZaghalE. Continuous glucose monitoring as a behavior modification tool. Clin Diabetes, 2020; 38(2):126–131; doi: 10.2337/cd19-0037
3.
ZahedaniAD, McLaughlinT, VeluvaliA, et al.Digital health application integrating wearable data and behavioral patterns improves metabolic health. NPJ Digit Med, 2023; 6(1):216–215; doi: 10.1038/s41746-023-00956-y
4.
VallisM, RyanH, BerardL, et al.How continuous glucose monitoring can motivate self-management: Can motivation follow behaviour? Can J Diabetes, 2023; 47(5):435–444; doi: 10.1016/j.jcjd.2023.04.001
5.
ZeeviD, KoremT, ZmoraN, et al.Personalized nutrition by prediction of glycemic responses. Cell, 2015; 163(5):1079–1094; doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2015.11.001
6.
CapponG, VettorettiM, SparacinoG, et al.Continuous glucose monitoring sensors for diabetes management: A review of technologies and applications. Diabetes Metab J, 2019; 43(4):383–397; doi: 10.4093/dmj.2019.0121
7.
SolimanA, DeSanctisV, YassinM, et al.Continuous glucose monitoring system and new era of early diagnosis of diabetes in high risk groups. Indian J Endocrinol Metab, 2014; 18(3):274–282; doi: 10.4103/2230-8210.131130
8.
Dehghani ZahedaniA, Shariat TorbaghanS, RahiliS, et al.Improvement in glucose regulation using a digital tracker and continuous glucose monitoring in healthy adults and those with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Ther, 2021; 12(7):1871–1886; doi: 10.1007/s13300-021-01081-3
9.
HallH, PerelmanD, BreschiA, et al.Glucotypes reveal new patterns of glucose dysregulation. PLoS Biol, 2018; 16(7):e2005143; doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2005143
10.
PiersantiA, GiuratoF, GöblC, et al.Software packages and tools for the analysis of continuous glucose monitoring data. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2023; 25(1):69–85; doi: 10.1089/dia.2022.0237
11.
OlsenMT, KlarskovCK, DunguAM, et al.Statistical packages and algorithms for the analysis of continuous glucose monitoring data: A systematic review. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2025; 19(3):787–809; doi: 10.1177/19322968231221803
12.
MoscardóV, GiménezM, OliverN, et al.Updated software for automated assessment of glucose variability and quality of glycemic control in diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2020; 22(10):701–708; doi: 10.1089/dia.2019.0416
13.
MazzeRS, LucidoD, LangerO, et al.Ambulatory glucose profile: Representation of verified self-monitored blood glucose data. Diabetes Care, 1987; 10(1):111–117; doi: 10.2337/diacare.10.1.111
14.
PernickNL, RodbardD. Personal computer programs to assist with self-monitoring of blood glucose and self-adjustment of insulin dosage. Diabetes Care, 1986; 9(1):61–69; doi: 10.2337/diacare.9.1.61
15.
NeinsteinA, WongJ, LookH, et al.A case study in open source innovation: Developing the Tidepool Platform for interoperability in type 1 diabetes management. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2016; 23(2):324–332; doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocv104
16.
ZhangXD, ZhangZ, WangD. CGManalyzer: An R package for analyzing continuous glucose monitoring studies. Bioinformatics, 2018; 34(9):1609–1611; doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btx826
17.
VigersT, ChanCL, Snell-BergeonJ, et al.cgmanalysis: An R package for descriptive analysis of continuous glucose monitor data. PLoS One, 2019; 14(10):e0216851; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216851
18.
BrollS, UrbanekJ, BuchananD, et al.Interpreting blood GLUcose data with R package iglu. PLoS One, 2021; 16(4):e0248560; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248560
19.
CapponG, SparacinoG, FacchinettiA. AGATA: A toolbox for automated glucose data analysis. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2024; 18(5):1109–1121; doi: 10.1177/19322968221147570
20.
BentB, HenriquezM, DunnJP. Cgmquantify: Python and R software packages for comprehensive analysis of interstitial glucose and glycemic variability from continuous glucose monitor data. IEEE Open J Eng Med Biol, 2021; 2:263–266; doi: 10.1109/OJEMB.2021.3105816
21.
BattelinoT, DanneT, BergenstalRM, et al.Clinical targets for continuous glucose monitoring data interpretation: Recommendations from the international consensus on time in range. Diabetes Care, 2019; 42(8):1593–1603; doi: 10.2337/dci19-0028
22.
BergenstalRM, AhmannAJ, BaileyT, et al.Recommendations for standardizing glucose reporting and analysis to optimize clinical decision making in diabetes: The Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP). Diabetes Technol Ther, 2013; 15(3):198–211; doi: 10.1089/dia.2013.0051
23.
SrinathKR. Python–The fastest growing programming language. Intr Res J Eng and Technol, n.d; 04(12).
24.
DanneT, NimriR, BattelinoT, et al.International consensus on use of continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care, 2017; 40(12):1631–1640; doi: 10.2337/dc17-1600
25.
HarrisCR, MillmanKJ, van der WaltSJ, et al.Array programming with NumPy. Nature, 2020; 585(7825):357–362; doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2
26.
McKinneyW. Data Structures for Statistical Computing in Python. In: Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference. (WaltS van der, MillmanJ. eds) 2010; pp. 56–61; doi: 10.25080/Majora-92bf1922-00a
27.
MillardLAC, PatelN, TillingK, et al.GLU: A software package for analysing continuously measured glucose levels in epidemiology. Int J Epidemiol, 2020; 49(3):744–757; doi: 10.1093/ije/dyaa004
28.
BergenstalRM, BeckRW, CloseKL, et al.Glucose Management Indicator (GMI): A new term for estimating A1C from continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care, 2018; 41(11):2275–2280; doi: 10.2337/dc18-1581
29.
NathanDM, KuenenJ, BorgR, et al.; A1c-Derived Average Glucose Study Group. Translating the A1C assay into estimated average glucose values. Diabetes Care, 2008; 31(8):1473–1478; doi: 10.2337/dc08-0545
30.
HernandezTL, BarbourLA. A standard approach to continuous glucose monitor data in pregnancy for the study of fetal growth and infant outcomes. Review-Article. Mary Ann Liebert, Inc: 140 Huguenot Street. 3rd Floor New Rochelle, NY 10801 USA; 2013.; doi: 10.1089/dia.2012.0223
31.
RodbardD. Interpretation of continuous glucose monitoring data: Glycemic variability and quality of glycemic control. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2009; 11(Suppl 1):S55–S67; doi: 10.1089/dia.2008.0132
PeyserTA, BaloAK, BuckinghamBA, et al.Glycemic variability percentage: A novel method for assessing glycemic variability from continuous glucose monitor data. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2018; 20(1):6–16; doi: 10.1089/dia.2017.0187
34.
HermanidesJ, VriesendorpTM, BosmanRJ, et al.Glucose variability is associated with intensive care unit mortality*. Crit Care Med, 2010; 38(3):838–842; doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181cc4be9
35.
FernandesNJ, NguyenN, ChunE, et al.Open-Source algorithm to calculate mean amplitude of glycemic excursions using short and long moving averages. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2022; 16(2):576–577; doi: 10.1177/19322968211061165
36.
ServiceFJ, NelsonRL. Characteristics of glycemic stability. Diabetes Care, 1980; 3(1):58–62; doi: 10.2337/diacare.3.1.58
37.
ServiceFJ, MolnarGD, RosevearJW, et al.Mean amplitude of glycemic excursions, a measure of diabetic instability. Diabetes, 1970; 19(9):644–655; doi: 10.2337/diab.19.9.644
38.
FritzscheG, KohnertK-D, HeinkeP, et al.The use of a computer program to calculate the mean amplitude of glycemic excursions. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2011; 13(3):319–325; doi: 10.1089/dia.2010.0108
39.
BaghurstPA. Calculating the mean amplitude of glycemic excursion from continuous glucose monitoring data: An automated algorithm. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2011; 13(3):296–302; doi: 10.1089/dia.2010.0090
40.
MolnarGD, TaylorWF, HoMM. Day-to-day variation of continuously monitored glycaemia: A further measure of diabetic instability. Diabetologia, 1972; 8(5):342–348; doi: 10.1007/BF01218495
41.
KovatchevBP, OttoE, CoxD, et al.Evaluation of a new measure of blood glucose variability in diabetes. Diabetes Care, 2006; 29(11):2433–2438; doi: 10.2337/dc06-1085
42.
KovatchevBP, CoxDJ, Gonder-FrederickLA, et al.Symmetrization of the blood glucose measurement scale and its applications. Diabetes Care, 1997; 20(11):1655–1658; doi: 10.2337/diacare.20.11.1655
43.
LeelarathnaL, ThabitH, WilinskaME, et al.Evaluating glucose control with a novel composite continuous glucose monitoring index. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2020; 14(2):277–283; doi: 10.1177/1932296819838525
44.
VigerskyRA, ShinJ, JiangB, et al.The comprehensive glucose pentagon: A glucose-centric composite metric for assessing glycemic control in persons with diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2018; 12(1):114–123; doi: 10.1177/1932296817718561
45.
ThomasA, SchönauerM, AchermannF, et al.The “glucose pentagon”: Assessing glycemic control of patients with diabetes mellitus by a model integrating different parameters from glucose profiles. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2009; 11(6):399–409; doi: 10.1089/dia.2008.0119
46.
KlonoffDC, WangJ, RodbardD, et al.A Glycemia Risk Index (GRI) of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia for continuous glucose monitoring validated by clinician ratings. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2023; 17(5):1226–1242; doi: 10.1177/19322968221085273
47.
HillNR, HindmarshPC, StevensRJ, et al.A method for assessing quality of control from glucose profiles. Diabet Med, 2007; 24(7):753–758; doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2007.02119.x
48.
HillNR, ThompsonB, BruceJ, et al.Glycaemic risk assessment in children and young people with Type 1 diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med, 2009; 26(7):740–743; doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2009.02763.x
49.
HillNR, OliverNS, ChoudharyP, et al.Normal reference range for mean tissue glucose and glycemic variability derived from continuous glucose monitoring for subjects without diabetes in different ethnic groups. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2011; 13(9):921–928; doi: 10.1089/dia.2010.0247
50.
MoscardóV, HerreroP, ReddyM, et al.Assessment of glucose control metrics by discriminant ratio. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2020; 22(10):719–726; doi: 10.1089/dia.2019.0415
51.
WójcickiJM. J”-Index. A new proposition of the assessment of current glucose control in diabetic patients. Horm Metab Res, 1995; 27(1):41–42; doi: 10.1055/s-2007-979906
52.
SchlichtkrullJ, MunckO, JersildM. The M-Value, an index of blood-sugar control in diabetics. Acta Med Scand, 1965; 177(1):95–102; doi: 10.1111/j.0954-6820.1965.tb01810.x
53.
AugsteinP, HeinkeP, NowakA, et al.Q-Score complements the time in range in the evaluation of short-term glycemic control. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2024:19322968241246209; doi: 10.1177/19322968241246209
54.
AugsteinP, HeinkeP, VogtL, et al.Q-Score: Development of a new metric for continuous glucose monitoring that enables stratification of antihyperglycaemic therapies. BMC Endocr Disord, 2015; 15:22; doi: 10.1186/s12902-015-0019-0
55.
BattelinoT, AlexanderCM, AmielSA, et al.Continuous glucose monitoring and metrics for clinical trials: An international consensus statement. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol, 2023; 11(1):42–57; doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(22)00319-9
56.
CastañedaJ, ArrietaA, van den HeuvelT, et al.Time in tight glucose range in type 1 diabetes: Predictive factors and achievable targets in real-world users of the MiniMed 780G System. Diabetes Care, 2024; 47(5):790–797; doi: 10.2337/dc23-1581
57.
SimonsonGD, CriegoAB, BattelinoT, et al.Expert panel recommendations for a standardized ambulatory glucose profile report for connected insulin pens. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2024; 26(11):814–822; doi: 10.1089/dia.2024.0107
SechterbergerMK, LuijfYM, DevriesJH. Poor agreement of computerized calculators for mean amplitude of glycemic excursions. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2014; 16(2):72–75; doi: 10.1089/dia.2013.0138
60.
HossainS. Visualization of Bioinformatics Data with Dash Bio. In: Proceedings of the 18th Python in Science Conference. (CallowayC, LippaD, NiederhutD, et al. eds) 2019; pp. 126–133; doi: 10.25080/Majora-7ddc1dd1-012
61.
MazzeRS, StrockE, WesleyD, et al.Characterizing glucose exposure for individuals with normal glucose tolerance using continuous glucose monitoring and ambulatory glucose profile analysis. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2008; 10(3):149–159; doi: 10.1089/dia.2007.0293
62.
RodbardD. Display of glucose distributions by date, time of day, and day of week: New and improved methods. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2009; 3(6):1388–1394.
63.
WolpertH, RodbardD, XueJ, et al.Characterizing insulin dosing behaviour and glycaemic excursions: Development of metrics using connected insulin pen and continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Obes Metab, 2025; 27(5):2507–2514; doi: 10.1111/dom.16249
64.
RodbardD, GargSK. Standardizing reporting of glucose and insulin data for patients on multiple daily injections using connected insulin pens and continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2021; 23(3):221–226; doi: 10.1089/dia.2021.0030
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
