The DOI matches its Crossref record; 99 of the 103 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effectiveness, reach, uptake, and feasibility of digital health interventions for adults with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Open accessAbstract
Background Digital health interventions have shown promising results for the management of type 2 diabetes, but a comparison of the effectiveness and implementation of the different modes is not currently available.Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effectiveness of SMS, smartphone application, and website-based interventions on improving glycaemia in adults with type 2 diabetes and report on their reach, uptake, and feasibility.Methods In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched CINAHL, Cochrane Central, Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycInfo on May 25, 2022, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the effectiveness of digital health interventions in reducing glycated haemoglobin A 1c (HbA 1c ) in adults with type 2 diabetes, published in English from Jan 1, 2009.Screening was carried out using Covidence, and data were extracted following Cochrane's guidelines.The primary endpoint assessed was the change in the mean (and 95% CI) plasma concentration of HbA 1c at 3 months or more.Cochrane risk of bias 2 was used to assess risk of bias.Data on reach, uptake, and feasibility were summarised narratively and data on HbA 1c reduction were synthesised in a meta-analysis.Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria was used to evaluate the level of evidence.The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021247845.Findings Of the 3236 records identified, 56 RCTs from 24 regions (n=11 486 participants), were included in the narrative synthesis, and 26 studies (n=4546 participants) in the meta-analysis.20 studies used SMS as the primary mode of delivery of the digital health intervention, 25 used smartphone applications, and 11 implemented interventions via websites.Smartphone application interventions reported higher reach compared with SMS and website-based interventions, but website-based interventions reported higher uptake compared with SMS and smartphone application interventions.Effective interventions, in general, included people with greater severity of their condition at baseline (ie, higher HbA 1c ) and administration of a higher dose intensity of the intervention, such as more frequent use of smartphone applications.Overall, digital health intervention group participants had a -0•30 (95% CI -0•42 to -0•19) percentage point greater reduction in HbA 1c , compared with control group participants.The difference in HbA 1c reduction between groups was statistically significant when interventions were delivered through smartphone applications (-0•42% [-0•63 to -0•20]) and via SMS (-0•37% [-0•57 to -0•17]), but not when delivered via websites (-0•09% [-0•64 to 0•46]).Due to the considerable heterogeneity between included studies, the level of evidence was moderate overall.Interpretation Smartphone application and SMS interventions, but not website-based interventions, were associated with better glycaemic control.However, the studies' heterogeneity should be recognised.Considering that both smartphone application and SMS interventions are effective for diabetes management, clinicians should consider factors such as reach, uptake, patient preference, and context of the intervention when deciding on the mode of delivery of the intervention.Nine in ten people worldwide own a feature phone and can receive SMS and four in five people have access to a smartphone, with numerous smartphone applications being available for diabetes management.Clinicians should familiarise themselves with this modality of programme delivery and encourage people with type 2 diabetes to use evidence-based applications for improving their self-management of diabetes.Future research needs to describe in detail the mediators and moderators of the effectiveness and implementation of SMS and smartphone application interventions, such as the optimal dose, frequency, timing, user interface, and communication mode to both further improve their effectiveness and to increase their reach, uptake, and feasibility.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials has shown that people with T2D who use digital apps had a 0.30% greater reduction in HbA1c when compared to a control group17.”
From mHealth low carbohydrate dietary intervention ameliorates glycaemic profile, blood pressure and weight status in people with type 2 diabetes (2025) · cites this paper as [17]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“prior meta-analyses excluded remote consultation and monitoring functionalities and focused only on T2DM patients with hypertension (comprising only 4 studies spanning 2009–2022)”
From The effectiveness of digital health intervention on glycemic control and physical activity in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [39]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“some studies concluded that web-based interventions do not effectively improve blood glucose in T2DM patients (39)”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2021) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.n71 · Cited by 108,283
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · Cited by 39,552
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
Sterne, J. A. C., Savović, J., Page, M. J., Elbers, R. G., Blencowe, N. S., Boutron, I., Cates, C. J., Cheng, H.-Y., Corbett, M. S., Eldridge, S. M., et al. (2019) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.l4898 · Cited by 34,787
Proctor, E., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., Hovmand, P., Aarons, G., Bunger, A., Griffey, R., & Hensley, M. (2011) · Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research · doi:10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7 · Cited by 8,721
GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence
Balshem, H., Helfand, M., Schünemann, H. J., Oxman, A. D., Kunz, R., Brozek, J., Vist, G. E., Falck-Ytter, Y., Meerpohl, J., & Norris, S. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.015 · Cited by 8,285
Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance
Moore, G. F., Audrey, S., Barker, M., Bond, L., Bonell, C., Hardeman, W., Moore, L., O'Cathain, A., Tinati, T., Wight, D., et al. (2015) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.h1258 · Cited by 6,204
Skivington, K., Matthews, L., Simpson, S. A., Craig, P., Baird, J., Blazeby, J. M., Boyd, K. A., Craig, N., French, D. P., McIntosh, E., et al. (2021) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.n2061 · Cited by 5,808
GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence—imprecision
Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Kunz, R., Brozek, J., Alonso-Coello, P., Rind, D., Devereaux, P. J., Montori, V. M., Freyschuss, B., Vist, G., et al. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.01.012 · Cited by 2,693
RE-AIM Planning and Evaluation Framework: Adapting to New Science and Practice With a 20-Year Review
Glasgow, R. E., Harden, S. M., Gaglio, B., Rabin, B., Smith, M. L., Porter, G. C., Ory, M. G., & Estabrooks, P. A. (2019) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2019.00064 · Cited by 2,528
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Greenwood, 2017, A systematic review of reviews evaluating technology-enabled diabetes self-management education and support, J Diabetes Sci Technol, 11, 1015, 10.1177/1932296817713506 · DOI · Paper page
- Zhang, 2019, A randomized controlled trial of a smart phone-based diabetes management application to improve blood glucose control in Chinese people with diabetes, J Med Internet Res, 9, 140
Cited by
Sorted by citations
American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee, ElSayed, N. A., McCoy, R. G., Aleppo, G., Balapattabi, K., Beverly, E. A., Briggs Early, K., Bruemmer, D., Echouffo-Tcheugui, J. B., Eichorst, B., et al. (2025) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc25-s005 · Cited by 305
Bajaj, M. S., McCoy, R. G., Balapattabi, K., Bannuru, R. R., Bellini, N. J., Bennett, A. K., Beverly, E. A., Early, K. B., ChallaSivaKanaka, S., Echouffo-Tcheugui, J. B., et al. (2025) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc26-s005 · Cited by 210
1. Improving Care and Promoting Health in Populations: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2025
ElSayed, N. A., McCoy, R. G., Aleppo, G., Balapattabi, K., Beverly, E. A., Early, K. B., Bruemmer, D., Ebekozien, O. A., Echouffo-Tcheugui, J. B., Ekhlaspour, L., et al. (2024) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc25-s001 · Cited by 169
Rosenstock, J., Juneja, R., Beals, J. M., Moyers, J. S., Ilag, L. L., & McCrimmon, R. J. (2024) · Endocrine Reviews · doi:10.1210/endrev/bnad037 · Cited by 83
Ji, C., Jiang, T., Liu, L., Zhang, J., & You, L. (2025) · Frontiers in Endocrinology · doi:10.3389/fendo.2025.1571362 · Cited by 75
Metadata
- Authors
- Moschonis, G., Siopis, G., Jung, J., Eweka, E., Willems, R., Kwasnicka, D., Asare, B. Y.-A., Kodithuwakku, V., Verhaeghe, N., Vedanthan, R., Annemans, L., Oldenburg, B., Manios, Y., Oldenburg, B., Kwasnicka, D., Gong, E., Jung, J., Asare, B. Y.-A., Kodithuwakku, V., Votis, K., Segkouli, S., Triantafyllidis, A., Kyparissis, O., Paliokas, I., Polychroniou, E., Annemans, L., Verhaeghe, N., Willems, R., De Craemer, D., Manios, Y., Anastasiou, K., Tserpes, K., Mavrogianni, C., Karaglani, E., Kalogerakou, E., Maragkoudaki, M., Ntzouvani, A., Kontochristopoulou, K., Dupont, S., Dupont, E., Dauzon, L., Roskams, M., Lennox-Chhugani, N., Perrin, M., Day, N. D., Ferrer, G., Snook, O., Aldasoro, E., Gil-Salmerón, A., Peiró, P. G., Curran, D., Lyne, F., Curreri, N. A., Moschonis, G., Siopis, G., Pierantozzi, N., D'Antonio, C., Vespasiani, G., Almonti, T., Skouteris, H., Taylor, T., Savaglio, M., Makrilakis, K., Stergiou, G., Liatis, S., Karamanakos, G., Koliaki, C., Kollias, A., Zikou, E., Dimosthenopoulos, H., Vedanthan, R., Huang, K.-Y., Adhikari, S., Qian, K., Dickhaus, J., Carney, K., Eweka, E., Sahito, F., Pavlovic, D., Djokic, D., Sahito, A., Battalova, G., Seghieri, C., Nutti, S., Vanieri, M., Belle, N., Bertarelli, G., Cantarelli, P., Ferre, F., Noci, A., Tortu, C., Bozzi, N., Ferrari, D., Borelli, R., Iotova, V., Yotov, Y., Usheva, N., Kozhuharova, A., Russeva, V., Marinova, V., Koleva, S., Atanasova, V., Stefanova, T., Tsochev, K., Aznar, L. M., Botaya, R. M., Lozano, G. B., De Miguel-Etayo, P., Gonzalez-Gil, E. M., Miguel-Berges, M. L., Pérez, S., Blázquez, B. O., Giménez-Legarre, N., Toti, F., Prifti, S., Bombaj, B., Doracaj, D., Laze, O., Lapardhaja, A., & Bruka, L.
- Affiliations
- Centre for Research and Technology Hellas (GR)
- Ghent University (BE)
- International Diabetes Federation (BE)
- International Foundation for Integrated Care (GB)
- La Trobe University (AU)
- National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR)
- Monash University (AU)
- Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute (AU)
- Deakin University (AU)
- York University (US)
- Medical University of Varna (BG)
- Universidad de Zaragoza (ES)
- University of Medicine Tirana (AL)
- ORCID
- Gong, Enying
- Votis, Konstantinos
- Segkouli, Sofia
- Triantafyllidis, Andreas
- Paliokas, Ioannis
- Mavrogianni, Christina
- Karaglani, Eva
- Ntzouvani, Agathi
- Lennox-Chhugani, Niamh
- Aldasoro, Edelweiss
- Gil-Salmerón, Alejandro
- Curreri, Nereide A.
- Vespasiani, Giacomo
- Skouteris, Helen
- Savaglio, Melissa
- Makrilakis, Konstantinos
- Stergiou, George
- Liatis, Stavros
- Koliaki, Chrysi
- Zikou, Eva
- Huang, Keng-Yen
- Adhikari, Samrachana
- Qian, Kun
- Seghieri, Chiara
- Belle, Nicola
- Bertarelli, Gaia
- Iotova, Violeta
- Yotov, Yoto
- Botaya, Rosa Magallón
- Giménez-Legarre, Natalia
- Doracaj, Ditila
- Venue
- The Lancet Digital Health
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2023-03
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- e125-e143
- ISSN
- 2589-7500 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4321488362
- Cited by
- 149
- References
- 103
- Citations by year
- 2026: 51 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 10
- FWCI
- 7.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- The Lancet Digital Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- ARCA (Università Ca' Foscari Venezia) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Deakin Research Online (Deakin University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Deakin University
- European Commission
- National Health and Medical Research Council (APP2007006)
- 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
- type 2 diabetes, digital health interventions, HbA1c, HbA1c reduction, text messaging intervention, mobile application, REACH regulation, intervention uptake, feasibility, diabetes self-management, dose intensity, dose-response relationship, GRADE evidence grading
- MeSH terms
- Smartphone, Adult, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Feasibility Studies, Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Mobile Applications
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