ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025
Application of Digital Tools in the Care of Patients With Diabetes: Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality of Chronic Care Statistically Mediates the Association Between eHealth Literacy and Self-Management Among Adults with Diabetes in a Shared Care Model.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Social media use and health empowerment among Chinese adults: the critical role of eHealth literacy and community interventions.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- A Hospital-Wide informatized glycemic management Team(WH-GMT) improves perioperative outcomes in type 2 diabetes: A prospective cohort study.Endocrine · 2026Article
- The application of AI-based interventions in diabetes personalized management: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2026Review
- Evaluating large language models using the Type 2 Diabetes Health Education guideline: a comparative analysis of ChatGPT-4.1, Claude-4.0, DeepSeek-V3, and ERNIE Bot 4.5 Turbo.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- An Evaluation of Digital Health Tools to Support Multidisciplinary Teams in Managing Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The global rise in the prevalence of diabetes significantly impacts the quality of life of both patients and their families. Despite advances in diabetes care, numerous challenges remain in its management. In recent years, digital tools have been increasingly integrated into diabetes care, demonstrating some positive outcomes. However, the long-term effectiveness and associated challenges of these tools in diabetes management remain areas for future research. Objective: This study aims to assess the types and current usage of digital tools in diabetes management, analyze their benefits and limitations, and provide recommendations for optimizing their future application in diabetes care. Methods: This scoping review followed the 5-stage framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across 9 electronic databases (CNKI, Wanfang Database, VIP, Sinomed, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library) from their inception to July 31, 2024. Study selection was independently performed by 2 reviewers, descriptive analysis was conducted, and findings were presented narratively, key study characteristics-including first author, publication date, country or region, study type, sample size, type of digital tools, intervention methods, intervention duration, limitations, and outcome indicators-were independently extracted and cross-checked by 2 investigators. Results: A total of 6263 articles were initially retrieved. After deduplication and a 2-stage screening process (initial screening based on titles and abstracts followed by full-text assessment), 45 studies meeting the predefined inclusion criteria were ultimately included for analysis, originating from 7 countries. The included studies demonstrated marked heterogeneity in research designs: randomized controlled trials (RCTs; n=26, 57.8%), non-RCTs (n=15, 33.3%), quasi-RCTs (n=1, 2.2%), observational studies (n=1, 2.2%), mixed-methods studies (n=1, 2.2%), and qualitative studies (n=1, 2.2%). The digital tools primarily included mobile health apps, integrated management information platforms, Diabetes Online Community (DOC), specialized monitoring and analytics tools, blood glucose information management systems, and remote monitoring and follow-up systems, among others. These tools were applied across home, hospital, and community settings. Outcome measures were primarily focused on evaluating glycemic control efficacy (eg, fasting blood glucose, postprandial blood glucose, and glycated hemoglobin), blood lipid levels, BMI, self-management capacity, quality of life, patient satisfaction, and diabetes knowledge. Conclusions: This review highlights the diversity and potential value of digital tools in diabetes care, particularly in supporting patient self-management and extending care across multiple settings. From a nursing perspective, digital interventions offer opportunities for individualized care, patient engagement, and continuity of services. However, challenges such as technology acceptance remain. Future studies should address gaps related to long-term effectiveness, economic evaluation, and tool adaptation for aging populations, while incorporating interdisciplinary approaches and real-world evidence to inform sustainable digital health strategies.
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.