Cited by 85Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDiabetes Management and EducationDigital Mental Health Interventions

Adherence to evidence-based guidelines among diabetes self-management apps

Open access
Breland, Jessica Y., Yeh, Vivian M., Yu, Jessica·2013·Translational Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Smartphone apps can provide real-time, interactive self-management aid to individuals with diabetes. It is currently unclear whether existing diabetes self-management apps follow evidence-based guidelines. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the extent to which existing diabetes self-management apps address the seven self-management behaviors recommended by the American Association of Diabetes Educators (the AADE7™). The term "diabetes" identified relevant self-management apps via the Apple App Store search engine in March 2012. Ratings were based on app descriptions and downloads. Chi-square analyses assessed differences in apps based on developer type. Apps promoted a median of two AADE7™ skills. Overall reliability between description and download ratings was good (kappa = .66). Reliability of individual skills was variable (kappa = .25 to .91). Most diabetes apps do not conform to evidence-based recommendations, and future app reviews would benefit from testing app performance. Future apps may also benefit from theory-based designs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s13142-013-0205-4

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Breland, J. Y., Yeh, V. M., & Yu, J.
Affiliations
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
Corresponding author
  • Breland, Jessica Y.
  • Yeh, Vivian M.
  • Yu, Jessica
Venue
Translational Behavioral Medicine
Published
2013-05-01
Volume
3
Issue
3
Pages
277-286
ISSN
  • 1613-9860 (ISSN-L)
  • 1869-6716
OpenAlex
W1967381373
Cited by
85
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1
FWCI
16.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
public-domain
Locations
  • Translational Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r25ca081137-15)
  • National Cancer Institute (R25-CA081137)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
mobile application, app quality assessment, app ratings, app downloads, app developers, diabetes self-management

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