Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Mar 27.
Published in final edited form as: Nat Biomed Eng. 2018 Jul 30;2(12):894–906. doi: 10.1038/s41551-018-0273-3

Figure 3. Sensing performance in SKH1 mouse model.

Figure 3.

(a) Subcutaneous insertion and adhesive attachment of CGMs on SKH1 mice. (b) Linear regression of signal versus BG value during a 3-day recording period, for two control sensors and two coated sensors. Note: BG values with higher deviation from linear regression lines occur during glucose challenges. (c) Non-recalibrated versus recalibrated (with all measured BG) data for both control and coated sensors during the entire recording period. (d) Non-recalibrated glucose level versus BG and recalibrated versus BG comparisons for both control and coated sensors. (e) Significance of various comparison methods of control and coated sensors (N=6 for each sensor group, and each sensor recording >1000 data points). All individual sensor trends (Controls #1 & #2, and Coated #1 & #2, as well as those in Supporting) were obtained from different individual mice. Data were presented as Mean ± SD. Significance was calculated by one-way ANOVA. * p<0.05.