ReviewCureus2024
Utilizing Artificial Intelligence Among Patients With Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integration of artificial intelligence and wearable technology in the management of diabetes and prediabetes.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence Technologies in Cancer Treatment for Older Adults: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2025-02-05Concerns/Issues about Data · Falsification/Fabrication of Data · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diabetes mellitus, a condition characterized by dysregulation of blood glucose levels, poses significant health challenges globally. This meta-analysis and systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of artificial intelligence (AI) in managing diabetes, underpinned by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The review scrutinized articles published between January 2019 and February 2024, sourced from six electronic databases: Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and MEDLINE, using keywords such as "Artificial intelligence use in medicine, Diabetes management, Health technology, Machine learning, Diabetic patients, AI applications, and Health informatics." The analysis revealed a notable variance in the prevalence of diabetes symptoms between patients managed with AI models and those receiving standard treatments or other machine learning models, with a risk ratio (RR) of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.88-1.08, I
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.