Cited by 62Diabetes Management and EducationDiabetes Management and ResearchMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Randomized trial of technology-assisted self-monitoring of blood glucose by low-income seniors: Improved glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Levine, Jason C., Burns, Edith, Whittle, Jeffrey, Fleming, Raymond, Knudson, Paul, Flax, Steve, Leventhal, Howard·2016·Journal of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) has been recommended for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. This trial tested an automated self-management monitor (ASMM) that reminds patients to perform SMBG, provides feedback on results of SMBG, and action tips for improved self-management. This delayed-start trial randomized participants to using the ASMM immediately (IG), or following a delay of 6 months (DG). Glycated hemoglobin (HgbA1c) level and survey data was collected at home visits every 3 months. 44 diabetic men and women, mean age 70, completed the 12-month trial. Baseline HgbA1c was 8.1 % ± 1.0, dropping to 7.3 ± 1.0 by 9 months, with a 3-month lag in the DG (F = 3.56, p = 0.004). Decrease in HgbA1c was significantly correlated to increased frequency of SMBG, R = 0.588, p < 0.01. Providing older diabetics with objective immediate contingent feedback resulted in more frequent SMBG that correlated with better glycemic control. This type of technology may provide real-time feedback not only to patient users, but to the health care system, allowing better integration of provider recommendations with patient-centered action.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10865-016-9763-5

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 27 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Levine, J. C., Burns, E., Whittle, J., Fleming, R., Knudson, P., Flax, S., & Leventhal, H.
Affiliations
  • University of Toledo (US)
  • Medical College of Wisconsin (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee (US)
  • FlexTech Systems (United States) (US)
  • Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
Corresponding author
Levine, Jason C.
Venue
Journal of Behavioral Medicine
Published
2016-07-01
Volume
39
Issue
6
Pages
1001-1008
ISSN
  • 0160-7715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3521
OpenAlex
W2466269479
Cited by
62
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 49 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2
FWCI
1.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (R44 AG019528-02)
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R18 HS17276-01)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
self-monitoring of blood glucose, type 2 diabetes, glycemic control, HbA1c, contingent feedback, older adults, low-income elderly, diabetes self-management
MeSH terms
Aged, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Male, Poverty, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Care, Software, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review