Cited by 25Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDiabetes Management and Education

Meta-analysis of telemonitoring to improve HbA1c levels: Promise for stroke survivors

Lieber, Bryan A, Taylor, Blake, Appelboom, Geoff, Prasad, Kiran, Bruce, Sam, Yang, Annie, Bruce, Eliza, Christophe, Brandon +1 more·2015·Journal of Clinical Neuroscience

Abstract

Monitoring glycemic control is useful not only in the primary prevention of stroke in diabetics, but also in the rehabilitation from and secondary prevention of stroke. In an often functionally and neurocognitively impaired population, however, poor compliance with treatment regimens is a major problem. Wireless, telemonitoring glucometers - often integrated into the patient's healthcare system - offer a solution to the compliance issue. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of telemonitoring technologies in improving long-term glycemic control. A search on www.clinicaltrials.gov, using keywords such as "telemonitoring" and "self-care device" was performed, and five trials were identified that compared hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels of a group receiving standard care (controls) to a group receiving a telemonitoring intervention. Four of the five studies showed a greater reduction in HbA1c in the intervention group compared to controls at 6 months, although only one was statistically significant. There was considerable heterogeneity between studies (I(2)=69.5%, p=0.02), and the random effects model estimated the aggregate effect size for mean difference in reduction of HbA1c levels to be 0.08% (95% confidence interval -0.12% to 0.28%), which was not statistically significant (p=0.42). The varying results may be due to specific factors in the trials that contributed to their large heterogeneity, and further trials are needed to support the role of telemonitoring in improving diabetes management in this population. Nonetheless, in the future telemonitoring may substantially help patients at risk of ischemic stroke and those who require close glucose monitoring.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jocn.2014.11.009

Cites

47 of 47 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lieber, B. A., Taylor, B., Appelboom, G., Prasad, K., Bruce, S., Yang, A., Bruce, E., Christophe, B., & Connolly, E. S.
Affiliations
  • New York University (US)
  • Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
Venue
Journal of Clinical Neuroscience
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-05
Volume
22
Issue
5
Pages
807-811
ISSN
0967-5868 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2136531290
Cited by
25
References
47
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3
FWCI
0.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
remote patient monitoring, HbA1c, glycemic control, stroke survivors, diabetes management, medication adherence, secondary stroke prevention, ischemic stroke, telemedicine
MeSH terms
Blood Glucose, Clinical Trials as Topic, Diabetes Mellitus, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Self Care, Telemedicine, Survivors, Stroke

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