ArticleJMIR diabetes2022
Barriers and Drivers Regarding the Use of Mobile Health Apps Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in the Netherlands: Explanatory Sequential Design Study.
Article in JMIR diabetes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- User experiences and perceptions on the use of digital health technologies in the management of type 2 diabetes: an integrative systematic review.Frontiers in clinical diabetes and healthcare · 2026Pooled it
- Experiences of Home-Dwelling Older Adults and Their Family Caregivers With Digital Health Services: Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Digital Health Interventions for Type 2 Diabetes: A Narrative Review of Mobile Technologies and Their Impact on Patients' Outcomes.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Impact of MMC-assisted glycemic control assistant on biochemical indicators of glucose metabolism in type 2 diabetes: A retrospective study.Journal of medical biochemistry · 2026Article
- Effects of a Nurse-Led Diabetes Perception Intervention Delivered via a Mobile Messaging Platform (LINE) on Glycemic Control and Patient Outcomes Among Adults with Diabetes and Poorly Controlled Glucose: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
- Trust in Medical AI: The Case of mHealth Diabetes Apps.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Article
- Article
- A Culturally Sensitive Mobile App (DiaFriend) to Improve Self-Care in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Development Study.JMIR diabetes · 2024Article
- Identification of challenges and leveraging mHealth technology, with need-based solutions to empower self-management in type 2 diabetes: a qualitative study.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2024Article
- Effects of an Electronic Medical Records-Linked Diabetes Self-Management System on Treatment Targets in Real Clinical Practice: Retrospective, Observational Cohort Study.Endocrinology and metabolism (Seoul, Korea) · 2024Observational
- Adoption of Wearable Insulin Biosensors for Diabetes Management: A Cross-Sectional Study.Cureus · 2023Article
- Overcoming the struggle of living with type 2 diabetes - diabetes specialist nurses' and patients' perspectives on digital interventions.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Implementation Science Perspectives on Implementing Telemedicine Interventions for Hypertension or Diabetes Management: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Article
- Mobile Health Apps for the Control and Self-management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Qualitative Study on Users' Acceptability and Acceptance.JMIR diabetes · 2023Article
- Extension of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 model for predicting mHealth acceptance using diabetes as an example: a cross-sectional validation study.BMJ health & care informatics · 2022Article
- Living withDigital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSelf-monitoring of blood glucose levels, food intake, and physical activity supports self-management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). There has been an increase in the development and availability of mobile health apps for T2DM.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to explore the actual use of mobile health apps for diabetes among patients with T2DM and the main barriers and drivers among app users and nonusers.
methodsAn explanatory sequential design was applied, starting with a web-based questionnaire followed by semistructured in-depth interviews. Data were collected between July and December 2020. Questionnaire data from 103 respondents were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics (version 25.0). Descriptive statistics were performed for the actual use of apps and items of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). The UTAUT includes 4 key constructs: performance expectancy (the belief that an app will help improve health performance), effort expectancy (level of ease associated with using an app), social influence (social support), and facilitating conditions (infrastructural support). Differences between users and nonusers were analyzed using chi-square tests for individual items. Independent 2-tailed t tests were performed to test for differences in mean scores per the UTAUT construct. In total, 16 respondents participated in the interviews (10 users and 6 nonusers of apps for T2DM). We performed content analysis using a deductive approach on all transcripts, guided by the UTAUT.
resultsRegarding actual use, 55.3% (57/103) were nonusers and 44.7% (46/103) were users of apps for T2DM. The main driver for the use of apps was the belief that using apps for managing diabetes would result in better personal health and well-being. The time and energy required to keep track of the data and understand the app were mentioned as barriers. Mean scores were significantly higher among users compared with nonusers of apps for T2DM for the constructs performance expectancy (4.06, SD 0.64 vs 3.29, SD 0.89; P<.001), effort expectancy (4.04, SD 0.62 vs 3.50, SD 0.82; P<.001), social influence (3.59, SD 0.55 vs 3.29, SD 0.54; P=.007), and facilitating conditions (4.22, SD 0.48 vs 3.65, SD 0.70; P<.001). On the basis of 16 in-depth interviews, it was recognized that health care professionals play an important role in supporting patients with T2DM in using apps. However, respondents noticed that their health care professionals were often not supportive of the use of apps for managing diabetes, did not show interest, or did not talk about apps. Reimbursement by insurance companies was mentioned as a missing facilitator.
conclusionsEmpowering health care professionals' engagement is of utmost importance in supporting patients with T2DM in the use of apps. Insurance companies can play a role in facilitating the use of diabetes apps by ensuring reimbursement.
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.