Cited by 42Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDiabetes Management and EducationMedication Adherence and Compliance

A Mobile Phone Informational Reminder to Improve Eye Care Adherence Among Diabetic Patients in Rural China: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Chen, Tingting, Zhu, Wenhui, Tang, Bobby, Jin, Ling, Fu, Haoxiang, Chen, Yuqun, Wang, Congyao, Zhang, Guoshan +7 more·2018·American Journal of Ophthalmology

Abstract

Purpose To determine whether short message service (SMS) reminders improve adherence to scheduled ocular examinations among patients with diabetes in rural China. Design Randomized controlled trial. Methods This study enrolled consecutive patients with diabetes scheduled for eye examinations at 5 hospitals in low-income areas of Guangdong, China from March 1, 2015 to May 31, 2016. Participants were randomized (1:1) to receive automated SMS reminders containing information about diabetic retinopathy (DR) 1 week and 3 days prior to scheduled eye appointments (Intervention) or to appointments without reminders (Control). Regression models following intention-to-treat principles were used to estimate the association between the main outcome (attendance within ± 1 week of scheduled visit) and membership in the Intervention group, with and without adjustment for other potential predictors of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included change in DR knowledge score (1, worst; 5, best) and endline satisfaction with care (3, worst; 15, best). Results Among 233 patients, 119 (51.1%) were randomized to Intervention (age 59.7 ± 11.3 years, 52.1% men) and 114 (48.9%) to Control (58.7 ± 9.50 years, 49.1% men). All participants provided data for the main study outcome. Attendance at scheduled appointments for the Intervention group (51/119, [42.9%]) was significantly higher than for Controls (16/114, [14.0%], between-group difference 28.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 17.9%, 39.8%], P < .001). Factors associated with attendance in multiple regression models included Intervention group membership (Relative Risk [RR] 3.04, 95% CI, 1.73-5.33, P < .001) and baseline DR knowledge (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.21-1.78, P < .001). Improvement in Satisfaction (mean difference 1.08, 95% CI 0.70-1.46, P < .001) and DR knowledge (mean difference 1.30, 95% CI 0.96-1.63, P < .001) were significantly higher for the Intervention group. Total cost of the intervention was US$5.40/person. Conclusion Low-cost SMS informational reminders significantly improved adherence to, knowledge about, and satisfaction with care. Additional interventions are needed to further improve adherence.

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 · 10.1016/j.ajo.2018.07.006

Cites

4 of 4 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
Chen, T., Zhu, W., Tang, B., Jin, L., Fu, H., Chen, Y., Wang, C., Zhang, G., Wang, J., Ye, T., Xiao, D., Vignarajan, J., Xiao, B., Kanagasingam, Y., & Congdon, N.
Affiliations
  • Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
  • Queen's University Belfast (GB)
  • Shaoguan Railway Hospital (CN)
  • Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
Corresponding author
Congdon, Nathan
Venue
American Journal of Ophthalmology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-10
Volume
194
Pages
54-62
ISSN
0002-9394 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2883876846
Cited by
42
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1
FWCI
4.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Ophthalmology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Orbis International
  • Fred Hollows Foundation (FHF)
  • World Diabetes Foundation (WDF) (WDF12-705)
  • Ulverscroft Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
Keywords
diabetic retinopathy, SMS reminders, mobile health, appointment attendance, diabetes mellitus, rural China, diabetic eye care, patient satisfaction, health education, low-income populations, patient-provider communication, patient satisfaction with care delivery, patient satisfaction with care quality, patient satisfaction with care access
MeSH terms
Aged, Appointments and Schedules, China, Diabetic Retinopathy, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Compliance, Rural Population, Reminder Systems, Cell Phone, Asian People, Text Messaging

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