Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35311691›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2022

Improving Outcomes Through Personalized Recommendations in a Remote Diabetes Monitoring Program: Observational Study.

Sowmya Kamath, Karthik Kappaganthu, Stefanie Painter, Anmol Madan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

4 authors.

Sowmya KamathTeladoc Health, Purchase, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0443-8221
Karthik KappaganthuTeladoc Health, Purchase, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8029-5379
Stefanie PainterTeladoc Health, Purchase, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7656-5970
Anmol MadanTeladoc Health, Purchase, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3300-3588

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiabetes management is complex, and program personalization has been identified to enhance engagement and clinical outcomes in diabetes management programs. However, 50% of individuals living with diabetes are unable to achieve glycemic control, presenting a gap in the delivery of self-management education and behavior change. Machine learning and recommender systems, which have been used within the health care setting, could be a feasible application for diabetes management programs to provide a personalized user experience and improve user engagement and outcomes.

objectiveThis study aims to evaluate machine learning models using member-level engagements to predict improvement in estimated A

methodsA retrospective study of Livongo for Diabetes member engagement data was analyzed within five action categories (interacting with a coach, reading education content, self-monitoring blood glucose level, tracking physical activity, and monitoring nutrition) to build a member-level model to predict if a specific type and level of engagement could lead to improved estimated A

resultsThe treatment effect was successfully computed within the five action categories on estimated A

conclusionsPersonalized action recommendations using heterogeneous treatment effects to compute the impact of member actions can reduce estimated A

Indexed as

causalengagementglycemic controlmachine learningmHealthmobile healthobservationalpersonalizationrecommendationrecommender systemstype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID35311691
PMCPMC8981007
OpenAlexW4220822330

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.