Trial reportScientific reports2025
Preliminary effectiveness and feasibility of ASHA-led mobile health intervention for diabetes care in Indian primary health care settings.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Balancing innovative medical devices with public health policies.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2026Article
- Assessment of knowledge, skills and acceptance of the M-SAKHI mHealth App by Indian maternal and child health community workers using a pre and post-evaluation design.Discover public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diabetes management in resource-limited settings faces challenges in screening, guideline-based treatment, and healthcare access. The IMPACT Diabetes study evaluated a community-based, technology-enabled task-shifting intervention for diabetes care in India. A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted in 16 villages/peri-urban areas across 8 primary health centers (PHCs) in two states in India. Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs) screened 1,785 community participants, identifying 418 individuals with diabetes. The intervention group received nine months of CDSS-supported care delivered by ASHAs under physician supervision, while the control group received usual care. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants achieving ≥ 0·5% reduction in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline. Secondary outcomes included healthcare utilization and medication adherence. A significantly higher proportion of intervention participants achieved HbA1c reduction ≥ 0·5% compared to the control group (21.8% vs. 10.3%, p < 0.05). Intervention participants had more frequent physician visits (85·0% vs. 29·8%), higher glucose-lowering medication adherence (63·0% vs. 43·1%, p < 0·05), and better engagement with diabetes management practices. Qualitative findings demonstrated that the intervention was acceptable and feasible for patients, ASHAs, and physicians, empowering ASHAs in chronic disease care. This study demonstrates that task-shifting and digital health tools can improve diabetes outcomes in low-resource settings. Future research should explore long-term sustainability and cost-effectiveness.
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.