ArticleJMIR diabetes2021
Health Internet Technology for Chronic Conditions: Review of Diabetes Management Apps.
Article in JMIR diabetes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- WeChat-Based Intervention for Glycemic Control in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Trial
- Evaluation of the Impact of Mobile Health App Vitadio in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- Exploring provider attitudes towards digital therapeutics for diabetes and depression.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- User-Centered Prototype Design of a Health Care Robot for Treating Type 2 Diabetes in the Community Pharmacy: Development and Usability Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Exploring mHealth app utilization for diabetes self-management: survey insights from a northern district in Malaysia.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Usability of mHealth Apps: An Evaluation Model Based on Task Analysis Methods and Eye Movement Data.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Effectiveness of a Smartphone App to Promote Physical Activity Among Persons With Type 2 Diabetes: Randomized Controlled Trial.Interactive journal of medical research · 2024Article
- Patient and Provider Experiences With a Digital App to Improve Compliance With Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocols: Mixed Methods Evaluation of a Canadian Experience.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- A Digital Platform and Smartphone App to Increase Physical Activity in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Overview Of a Technical Solution.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Mobile Apps for People With Rare Diseases: Review and Quality Assessment Using Mobile App Rating Scale.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Review
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMobile health (mHealth) smartphone apps have shown promise in the self-management of chronic disease. In today's oversaturated health app market, selection criteria that consumers are employing to choose mHealth apps for disease self-management are of paramount importance. App quality is critical in monitoring disease controls but is often linked to consumer popularity rather than clinical recommendations of effectiveness in disease management. Management of key disease variances can be performed through these apps to increase patient engagement in disease self-management. This paper provides a comprehensive review of features found in mHealth apps frequently used in the self- management of diabetes.
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to review features of frequently used and high consumer-rated mHealth apps used in the self-management of diabetes. This study aimed to highlight key features of consumer-favored mHealth apps used in the self-management of diabetes.
methodsA 2-fold approach was adopted involving the Apple iOS store and the Google search engine. The primary search was conducted on the Apple iOS store using the term "diabetes apps" (device used: Apple iPad). The top 5 most frequently used mHealth apps were identified and rated by the number of consumer reviews, app ratings, and the presence of key diabetes management features, such as dietary blood glucose, A
resultsIn total, 12 mHealth apps were reviewed due to their appearing across 4 evaluated sources. Only 1 health app-Glucose Buddy Diabetes Tracker-appeared as the most frequently used within the Apple iOS store and across the other 3 sources. The OneTouch Reveal app ranked first on the list in the iOS store with 39,000 consumer reviews and a rating of 4.7 out of 5.0 stars but only appeared in 1 of the other 3 sources. Blood glucose tracking was present across all apps, but other disease management features varied in type with at least 3 of the 5 key features being present across the 12 reviewed apps. Subscription cost and integration needs were present in the apps which could impact consumers' decision to select apps. Although mobile app preference was assessed and defined by the number of consumer reviews and star ratings, there were no scientific standards used in the selection and ranking of the health apps within this study.
conclusionsmHealth apps have shown promise in chronic disease management, but a surge in development of these nonregulated health solutions points to a need for regulation, standardization, and quality control. A governing body of health IT professionals, clinicians, policymakers, payors, and patients could be beneficial in defining health app standards for effective chronic disease management. Variabilities in features, cost, and other aspects of management could be reduced by regulatory uniformity, which would increase patient engagement and improve disease outcomes.
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.