Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29740786›Full record

ReviewJournal of general internal medicine2018

Rapid Evidence Review of Mobile Applications for Self-management of Diabetes.

Stephanie Veazie, Kara Winchell, Jennifer Gilbert, Robin Paynter, Ilya Ivlev, Karen B Eden, Kerri Nussbaum, Nicole Weiskopf, Jeanne-Marie Guise, Mark Helfand

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of general internal medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

74 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Content Analysis: First-Time Patient User Challenges with Top-Rated Commercial Diabetes Apps.Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2021
    Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Stephanie VeazieScientific Resource Center, Portland VA Research Foundation, Portland, OR, USA. stephanie.veazie@va.gov.
Kara WinchellScientific Resource Center, Portland VA Research Foundation, Portland, OR, USA.
Jennifer GilbertScientific Resource Center, Portland VA Research Foundation, Portland, OR, USA.
Robin PaynterScientific Resource Center, Portland VA Research Foundation, Portland, OR, USA.
Ilya IvlevDepartment of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Karen B EdenDepartment of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Kerri NussbaumDepartment of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Nicole WeiskopfDepartment of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Jeanne-Marie GuiseScientific Resource Center, Portland VA Research Foundation, Portland, OR, USA.
Mark HelfandDepartment of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.

Funding

TRAINING PROGRAM IN HEALTH INFORMATICST15LM007088 · NLM · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI WILLIAM R HERSH, Vishnu Mohan · 1992 to 2026
$23.4M
NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007088
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients with diabetes lack information on which commercially available applications (apps) improve diabetes-related outcomes. We conducted a rapid evidence review to examine features, clinical efficacy, and usability of apps for self-management of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in adults.

methodsOvid/Medline and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for systematic reviews and technology assessments. Reference lists of relevant systematic reviews were examined for primary studies. Additional searches for primary studies were conducted online, through Ovid/Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov . Studies were evaluated for eligibility based on predetermined criteria, data were extracted, study quality was assessed using a risk of bias tool, information on app features was collected, and app usability was assessed. Results are summarized qualitatively.

resultsFifteen articles evaluating 11 apps were identified: six apps for type 1 and five apps for type 2 diabetes. Common features of apps included setting reminders and tracking blood glucose and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), medication use, physical activity, and weight. Compared with controls, use of eight apps, when paired with support from a healthcare provider or study staff, improved at least one outcome, most often HbA1c. Patients did not experience improvements in quality of life, blood pressure, or weight, regardless of app used or type of diabetes. Study quality was variable. Of the eight apps available for usability testing, two were scored "acceptable," three were "marginal," and three were "not acceptable." DISCUSSION: Limited evidence suggests that use of some commercially available apps, when combined with additional support from a healthcare provider or study staff, may improve some short-term diabetes-related outcomes. The impact of these apps on longer-term outcomes is unclear. More rigorous and longer-term studies of apps are needed. REGISTRATION: This review was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). The protocol is available at: http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/topics/diabetes-mobile-devices/research-protocol .

Indexed as

Cell PhoneMobile ApplicationsDiabetes MellitusEvidence-Based MedicineHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSelf CareSelf-Managementconsumer health informaticsdecision makingdiabetesself-managementtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID29740786
PMCPMC6025680

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.