ReviewJournal of diabetes science and technology2023
Key Considerations for Understanding Usability of Digital Health Initiatives for Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Qualitative Literature Review.
Review in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A bibliometric analysis of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on diabetes mellitus: global research trends from scopus database (1988-2024).Cardiovascular diabetology. Endocrinology reports · 2026Review
- Article
- The Use of Digital Health Interventions for Cardiometabolic Diseases Among South Asian and Black Minority Ethnic Groups: Realist Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Review
- Interventions incorporating a multi-disciplinary team approach and a dedicated care team can help reduce preventable hospital readmissions of people with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A scoping review of current literature.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe rapidly growing number of adults with type 2 diabetes globally means the uses and benefits of digital health initiatives to enhance self-management of diabetes warrant review. This systematic qualitative literature review aimed to understand usability of digital health initiatives for adults with type 2 diabetes.
methodsThis systematic qualitative literature review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, the PRISMA 2020 Statement methodology. Three databases were used (SCOPUS, Medline, and CINAHL) to identify studies published from 2016 to 2021 that focused on experiences, evaluations, and usability of digital health initiatives aimed at helping adults with type 2 diabetes to self-manage their condition.
resultsFrom the 407 studies identified, 35 studies were assessed for eligibility with 10 studies included in the final synthesis. Five main themes emerged: (1) unmet emotional needs, (2) enhancing self-management, (3) desire for education, (4) usability/user-experience, and (5) risk of biomedical marker reductionism.
conclusionsThis review identified 5 key themes for consideration to understand usability of digital health initiatives. If these unmet psychosocial needs of adults with type 2 diabetes are better addressed in digital health initiatives, enhanced daily self-management will lead to more optimal diabetes management which can increase overall health outcomes, reduce the risk of longer-term complications, enhance quality of life for type 2 diabetes and improve more widespread adoption of digital health initiatives.
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.