Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32143452›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2020

Smartphones and Apps to Control Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Level in Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

María Begoña Martos-Cabrera, Almudena Velando-Soriano, Laura Pradas-Hernández, Nora Suleiman-Martos, Guillermo A Cañadas-De la Fuente, Luis Albendín-García, José L Gómez-Urquiza

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

7 authors.

María Begoña Martos-CabreraSan Cecilio Clinical University Hospital, Andalusian Health Service, Avenida del Conocimiento, s/n, 18016 Granada, Spain.
Almudena Velando-SorianoBenamaurel, Northeast District of Granada, Andalusian Health Service, 18817 Granada, Spain.
Laura Pradas-HernándezLas Gabias Health Center, Granada Metropolitan District, Andalusian-Health Service, Plaza Montes Jovellar S.N, 18110 Granada, Spain.
Nora Suleiman-MartosFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Granada, Calle Cortadura del Valle S.N., 51001 Ceuta, Spain.
Guillermo A Cañadas-De la FuenteFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Granada, Avenida de la Ilustración, 60, 18016 Granada, Spain.
Luis Albendín-GarcíaLa Chana Health Center, Granada Metropolitan District, Andalusian Health Service, Calle Virgen de la Consolación, 12, 18015 Granada, Spain.
José L Gómez-UrquizaFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Granada, Avenida de la Ilustración, 60, 18016 Granada, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDiabetes mellitus is a chronic endocrine-metabolic disease, the evolution of which is closely related to people´s self-control of glycemic levels through nutrition, exercise, and medicines.

aimTo determine whether smartphone apps can help persons with diabetes to improve their % levels of glycosylated hemoglobin.

methodA systematic review and meta-analysis were done. ProQuest, Pubmed/Medline, and Scopus databases were used. The search equation used was "(Prevention and Control) AND Diabetes Mellitus AND Smartphones". The inclusion criteria applied were clinical trials, conducted in 2014-2019.

resultsn = 18 studies were included in the review. The studies tried different applications to monitor glycemia and support patients to improve glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels. More than half of the studies found statistically significant differences in HbA1c in the intervention group compared with the control group. Eleven studies were included in the meta-analysis and the study sample was n = 545 for the experimental group and n = 454 for the control group. The meta-analytic estimation of the HbA1c % level means differences between intervention and control group was statistically significant in favour of the intervention group with a mean difference of -0.37 (-0.58, -0.15. 95% confidence interval).

conclusionSmartphone apps can help people with diabetes to improve their level of HbA1c, but the clinical impact is low.

Indexed as

diabetes mellitusglycosylated hemoglobinhealth educationmeta-analysisprevention and controlsmartphone application

Identifiers

PMID32143452
PMCPMC7141208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.