ReviewmHealth2017
mHealth for diabetes support: a systematic review of apps available on the Italian market.
Review in mHealth, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Usage of Mobile Applications or Mobile Health Technology to Improve Diet Quality in Adults.Nutrients · 2022Pooled it
- A Comparison of Functional Features in Chinese and US Mobile Apps for Diabetes Self-Management: A Systematic Search in App Stores and Content Analysis.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2019Pooled it
- Health Tracking via Mobile Apps for Depression Self-management: Qualitative Content Analysis of User Reviews.JMIR human factors · 2022Article
- Remote Healthcare for Elderly People Using Wearables: A Review.Biosensors · 2022Review
- Analysis of Effectiveness and Psychological Techniques Implemented in mHealth Solutions for Middle-Aged and Elderly Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: A Narrative Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Factors Influencing Motivation and Engagement in Mobile Health Among Patients With Sickle Cell Disease in Low-Prevalence, High-Income Countries: Qualitative Exploration of Patient Requirements.JMIR human factors · 2020Article
- Understanding the quality, effectiveness and attributes of top-rated smartphone health apps.Evidence-based mental health · 2019Article
- Medical Correctness and User Friendliness of Available Apps for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: Systematic Search Combined With Guideline Adherence and Usability Evaluation.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
mHealth is an expanding field of research and experimentation, concerned with the potentialities of mobile applications as tools to enhance patients' abilities in the management of chronic conditions. We present a systematic review of mHealth applications available on the Italian market and for the Italian speakers in order to assess their reported usability and functions. The review shows that there are rather few products on offer and the ones that are available display weak educational components, do not seem to be based on solid theoretical models of behavior change or decision making, and do not seem to be intended as devices to be integrated in the ecology of the doctor-patient relationship.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.