Cited by 34Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationDiabetes Management and EducationMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Web-Based Remote Monitoring Systems for Self-Managing Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review

Mushcab, Hayat, Kernohan, W. George, Wallace, Jonathan, Martin, Suzanne·2015·Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics

Abstract

This systematic review aims to evaluate evidence for viability and impact of Web-based telemonitoring for managing type 2 diabetes mellitus. A review protocol included searching Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, the Cochrane Library, and PubMed using the following terms: telemonitoring, type 2 diabetes mellitus, self-management, and web-based Internet solutions. The technology used, trial design, quality of life measures, and the glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels were extracted. This review identified 426 publications; of these, 19 met preset inclusion criteria. Ten quasi-experimental research designs were found, of which seven were pre–posttest studies, two were cohort studies, and one was an interrupted time-series study; in addition, there were nine randomized controlled trials. Web-based remote monitoring from home to hospital is a viable approach for healthcare delivery and enhances patients' quality of life. Six of these studies were conducted in South Korea, five in the United States, three in the United Kingdom, two in Taiwan, and one each in Spain, Poland, and India. The duration of the studies varied from 4 weeks to 18 months, and the participants were all adults. Fifteen studies showed positive improvement in HbA1c levels. One study showed high acceptance of the technology among participants. It remains challenging to identify clear evidence of effectiveness in the rapidly changing area of remote monitoring in diabetes care. Both the technology and its implementations are complex. The optimal design of a telemedicine system is still uncertain, and the value of the real-time blood glucose transmissions is still controversial.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/dia.2014.0296

Cites

40 of 40 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
Mushcab, H., Kernohan, W. G., Wallace, J., & Martin, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Ulster (GB)
  • Institute of Nursing and Health Research
Corresponding author
Mushcab, Hayat
Venue
Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics
Published
2015-07
Volume
17
Issue
7
Pages
498-509
ISSN
  • 1520-9156 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-8593
OpenAlex
W2097130667
Cited by
34
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6
FWCI
0.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, remote patient monitoring, web-based remote monitoring, diabetes self-management, HbA1c, quality of life, telemedicine, technology acceptance
MeSH terms
Adult, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, United Kingdom, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, India, Monitoring, Physiologic, Poland, Quality of Life, Self Care, Spain, Taiwan, United States, Telemedicine, Internet, Republic of Korea

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