Skip to content
Clarrio.ai

Therapeutic area · Diabetes, obesity, pre-diabetes

Connect metabolic biomarkers, treatment, and daily behavior

HbA1c and lipid panels summarize months in one number. Clarrio.ai adds the glucose, weight, sleep, activity and nutrition context that sits between those numbers. Align clinical, treatment and behavioral information on one shared longitudinal timeline, where available and appropriate to the program.

What Clarrio.ai captures

  • Nutrition and appetite check-ins
  • Side-effect PROs
  • Medication persistence confirmations
  • CGM glucose
  • HbA1c, lipids, liver enzymes
  • Weight and body composition

Longitudinal health intelligence

Disease, treatment and behavior on one timeline

Align clinical observations, medication or intervention history, and daily-life context without losing source meaning. Available data and review boundaries depend on the program.

One person / one shared timeline

Illustrative research data · Synthetic demonstration

Health and disease trajectories

Fasting glucose

Treatments and interventions

Exposure · dose · reported experience

12345678

Behavior and daily life

Average daily activity

Shared time axis / weeks

Week 4 / Disease125 mg/dL · Illustrative laboratory record

Week 4 / TreatmentReview · No dose change recorded

Week 4 / Behavior29 min · Routine resumed

Open related use case

Separate measures and independently scaled channels; values appear in their own units. Temporal alignment does not establish causality.

The evidence gap

Quarterly labs tell you where someone landed, not how they got there

Diabetes and obesity care generates rich continuous data, including CGM traces, smart scales and activity trackers, but it is fragmented across vendor apps and rarely reaches research datasets in a harmonized form.

With new therapies changing weight and glycemic trajectories, sponsors and clinicians need to understand real-world response over time: persistence, side effects, lifestyle change and what happens after dose adjustments or discontinuation.

Type 2 diabetes

Time-in-range and glucose variability change weekly; HbA1c reflects a long average.

Obesity therapies

Real-world persistence and weight trajectories after starting or stopping therapy.

Pre-diabetes

Early lifestyle change is visible in daily data long before labs move.

Type 1 diabetes

Sleep, exercise and illness context around hypoglycemia events.

Weekly mean glucose (mg/dL) over 120 days

Observations2

Events in periodNot visible

Events with no nearby visit3 of 3

Two lab visits suggest a modest improvement. The synthetic record shows changes around a holiday and a dose adjustment. Timing does not establish a treatment effect.

Illustrative · synthetic data

How Clarrio.ai addresses the gap

Collection, integration and analytics, designed for this area

  1. 01

    Device integration

    CGM, scales and wearables harmonized to one timeline.

  2. 02

    Lab harmonization

    Results mapped to LOINC with units, comparable across labs.

  3. 03

    Lifestyle check-ins

    Nutrition, appetite and side-effect questionnaires.

  4. 04

    Cohort analytics

    Trajectories grouped by therapy, start date or program.

Data captured

Three layers of data, kept distinct

Select a layer. Exact sources depend on deployment configuration and data permissions.

Captured from patients or caregivers in the Patient App.

  • Nutrition and appetite check-ins
  • Side-effect PROs
  • Medication persistence confirmations

Research & operational outputs

Research and operational deliverables

Metabolic dashboard

Biomarkers, sleep, activity and weight trends together.

Therapy trajectory view

Weight and glucose change since therapy start, across a cohort.

Persistence summary

Who continues, pauses or stops, with reported reasons.

Research dataset

Person-week variables with a data dictionary.

Value for each stakeholder

Pharmaceutical & biotech

Real-world persistence, tolerability and trajectory evidence for metabolic therapies.

Hospitals & endocrinology

One view of device and lab data before each review.

CROs

Remote device data with fewer site visits.

Payers

Program engagement and follow-up completeness.

Longevity clinics

Metabolic domain profiles within preventive programs.

Program evaluation

Where Clarrio.ai can create measurable value

These are the KPIs we agree with customers before deployment, measured against their own baseline. Data coverage, patient experience and clinical outcomes answer different questions. Higher engagement alone does not demonstrate better health or lower utilization.

Explore benefits and evidence
LeverHow it is measured
Follow-up completionScheduled follow-ups with data relative to due
Reporting burdenManual hours exporting device data
Cohort retentionParticipants active at month 6 and 12
Data usabilityShare of person-weeks meeting analysis criteria

Illustrative use case

Weight-therapy persistence study

Medical affairs, illustrative

Weight-therapy persistence study

  1. Month 0

    Participants starting therapy enroll; scale and wearable paired.

  2. Months 1–6

    Weekly weight, monthly side-effect and appetite check-ins.

  3. Month 4

    Persistence summary highlights pauses; reasons captured in-app.

  4. Month 12

    Trajectory dataset supports an observational publication plan.

Illustrative · synthetic data

Type 2 diabetesType 1 diabetesObesityPre-diabetesMASLD / fatty liver

Clarrio.ai has joined Mayo Clinic Platform's Solutions Studio, supporting its mission to advance interoperable, data-driven healthcare innovation. This does not imply endorsement or clinical validation.

  • Consent and data governance
  • Privacy-by-design principles
  • Role-based access
  • Flexible deployment
  • Data residency options
  • FHIR-based interoperability
  • Research-use positioning, not diagnosis

Explore Metabolic Health Intelligence

Explore Metabolic Health Intelligence

Evidence interpretation

Dense sensor sampling is not the same as complete metabolic context

Device wear, meal context and intermittent laboratory results represent different measurement layers. Comparisons need consistent windows and source methods. Neither a sensor pattern nor a program check-in establishes the effect of a routine or service.

Benefits in practice

From metabolic health & diabetes observations to a useful review

Pharma & biotech

Start with the evidence question a decision-maker actually needs answered

Routine records can describe encounters and prescriptions while leaving daily function, symptom burden and experience under-observed. Adding remote data can fill selected gaps, but a large dataset is not automatically decision-ready. Population selection, questionnaire suitability, exposure timing and missing observations can all change the interpretation of a longitudinal analysis.

  1. 01

    Specify the evidence objective

    Define the population, observation window, outcome concept and intended decision before selecting sources.

  2. 02

    Collect and reconcile

    Combine appropriately scoped Patient App reports with available clinical and device data in the Platform; keep reported experience separate from recorded events.

  3. 03

    Review before analysis

    Use source-aware review to inspect context and quality. Agree variable definitions, analysis methods and limitations with the study team.

For the professional team

Clinical development, medical affairs and HEOR teams can work from a common record while asking different questions. Clinical operations needs coverage by site and timepoint; an evidence analyst needs definitions and provenance; medical affairs needs an account of the population and study limitations. Those outputs should not be treated as interchangeable.

For patients, members and caregivers

Participants have a structured way to contribute the experience that encounters may miss. Questions should be meaningful, proportionate and appropriate to the population. Explain the study purpose, who reviews submissions and whether reporting receives an individual response; a research diary is not an emergency service.

For payers and program funders

A payer-facing evidence package should connect patient experience to a defined decision question and relevant population. Include baseline characteristics, follow-up, missingness and the analysis method. Patient-reported experience can complement other evidence, but it does not alone establish comparative effectiveness, economic value or a coverage recommendation.

Illustrative review brief
Population definition
Eligibility, enrollment dates and relevant baseline characteristics
Longitudinal variables
Source, units, assessment window and missing-data conventions
Evidence limitations
Selection, confounding and generalisability to the decision population

Workflow illustration · not a customer result or live record

What to evaluate before making a claim

Assess suitability against the research question: provenance, completeness, accuracy and relevance. Predefine the analysis rather than choosing a favorable pattern after viewing the results. Publication and payer use require appropriate scientific review.

Explore evidence and evaluation

Payers & health economics

Distinguish richer patient context from evidence of value

Claims and encounter datasets can describe recorded utilization without fully capturing function, experience or the practical burden of a program. Patient reports add a different perspective, but they can be incomplete or drawn from a population unlike the members covered by a payer. The task is to establish whether those observations are suitable for a specific appraisal question, not to turn engagement into a savings claim.

  1. 01

    Define the appraisal question

    Specify the relevant covered population, decision, comparator where needed and evaluation horizon.

  2. 02

    Assess data suitability

    Review provenance, participation, measurement windows and missingness before examining results.

  3. 03

    Build the evidence account

    Combine appropriately governed patient experience with relevant clinical or utilization evidence; document assumptions and limits for expert appraisal.

For the professional team

HEOR and population-health teams can examine how reported experience varies across the observation period and which groups are represented. A useful output explains the denominator behind a measure and the observations excluded from analysis. Governance must also define the permitted purpose of any linkage to payer-held data.

For patients, members and caregivers

The member perspective should remain visible in a program evaluation: burden, everyday function, access and what participants consider meaningful. Reporting should not become an unexplained condition of receiving services. Explain the collection purpose and permitted uses in a way members can understand.

For payers and program funders

Decision support means an inspectable evidence package, not an automatic reimbursement verdict. Include the target population, relevant baseline differences, data sources, follow-up and limitations. Cost and utilization conclusions need appropriate data and analysis; neither can be inferred from app activity or observation coverage.

Illustrative review brief
Decision context
Population, appraisal question and evaluation horizon
Suitability account
Provenance, completeness, accuracy and relevance
Interpretation boundary
What the analysis can support and what remains uncertain

Workflow illustration · not a customer result or live record

What to evaluate before making a claim

Separate program participation, patient-reported experience, clinical outcomes and economic endpoints. Define each before collection, use an appropriate comparison where the question requires one and examine whether findings transfer to the covered population.

Explore evidence and evaluation

Patients, members & caregivers

Give the person contributing data a meaningful place in the workflow

A person can complete many questions without understanding why they are being asked or who will read the answers. Device observations may look precise while missing personal context. A useful longitudinal journey starts with the person's priorities and makes the reporting purpose, burden and review arrangements understandable.

  1. 01

    Explain the purpose

    Agree what the care or research program needs to learn and what participation involves.

  2. 02

    Capture lived experience

    Use appropriate reports alongside available observations; distinguish the patient's own answers from caregiver observations.

  3. 03

    Bring context to review

    Discuss a dated interval with the responsible professional, including what is missing and what matters to the person.

For the professional team

Teams gain context for a more specific conversation, but should not assume that a missed report means a person disengaged. Accessibility, fatigue, language and connectivity may affect reporting. Define support and review arrangements before introducing new questions.

For patients, members and caregivers

Patients and members can keep a dated account of experiences they might otherwise forget. Caregivers can contribute observations when appropriately scoped, without replacing the person's own perspective. Personal patterns invite discussion; they are not instructions or proof that a particular routine produced an outcome.

For payers and program funders

A program's apparent reach can hide who could not participate. Payers and commissioners should examine access, reporting burden and representativeness alongside outcome evidence. Patient experience is an important perspective in appraisal, not a shortcut to an economic conclusion.

Illustrative review brief
Personal context
The person's own priorities and dated reports
Reporting perspective
Patient answer or appropriately identified caregiver observation
Review arrangement
Who reviews reports, when and through which contact pathway

Workflow illustration · not a customer result or live record

What to evaluate before making a claim

Ask whether reporting is understandable, manageable and meaningful. Examine completion alongside accessibility and support needs. A high completion rate alone does not show that people feel heard or that a program has improved their health.

Explore evidence and evaluation

Request a demo

Explore disease, treatment and behavior together

Explore how clinical, treatment and behavioral information align around your program and the research or review questions your team needs to answer.

Book a demo

Opens the Calendly booking page in a new tab.

Prefer to write first? Send an inquiry and the team will reply.