ReviewHormones (Athens, Greece)2018
Review of mobile applications for optimizing the follow-up care of patients with diabetes.
Review in Hormones (Athens, Greece), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Games and Health Education for Diabetes Control: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Smartphone-Based Technology in Diabetes Management.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral smartphone applications aim at facilitating communication between patients and healthcare providers. In this review, we evaluate and compare the most promising applications in the field of diabetes mellitus (DM) and obesity. Most applications monitor body weight, fasting or postprandial blood glucose, glycosylated hemoglobin (Hgb) A1c (HgbA1c), and units and types of insulin used.
methodsNine clinically tested applications and two Web platforms were grouped into three categories that were evaluated and compared. Group 1 included seven applications focusing mainly on monitoring DM, fitness and weight, blood glucose levels, and HbA1c. Group 2 included two applications that focus on insulin dosage calculators and glucose self-monitoring tests. Group 3 included two web-platforms that interact with patients via SMS (short message service) messaging.
resultsA common feature of the applications examined was the limited number of clinical parameters tested, the small number of subjects taking part in the evaluation, and the fact that the controls were not randomized. Furthermore, the interfaces of the applications varied and were not standardized. Finally, another common characteristic across applications was the lack of standardization of the interface and the overall structure due to language barriers, the devices usually having been designed around a specific language. Lastly, most applications lacked a critical mass of evaluators and were thus not worthy of being considered of serious clinical relevance.
conclusionsThe current smartphone applications for DM are characterized by a limited number of participants, a small number of parameters, and a lack of standardization.
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.