Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 388

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effectiveness of mHealth interventions for patients with diabetes: An overview of systematic reviews

Open access
Kitsiou, Spyros, Paré, Guy, Jaana, Mirou, Gerber, Ben·2017·PLOS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is a common chronic disease that places an unprecedented strain on health care systems worldwide. Mobile health technologies such as smartphones, mobile applications, and wearable devices, known as mHealth, offer significant and innovative opportunities for improving patient to provider communication and self-management of diabetes. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this overview is to critically appraise and consolidate evidence from multiple systematic reviews on the effectiveness of mHealth interventions for patients with diabetes to inform policy makers, practitioners, and researchers. METHODS: A comprehensive search on multiple databases was performed to identify relevant systematic reviews published between January 1996 and December 2015. Two authors independently selected reviews, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of included reviews using AMSTAR. RESULTS: Fifteen systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2014 were eligible for inclusion. The quality of the reviews varied considerably and most of them had important methodological limitations. Focusing on systematic reviews that offered the most direct evidence, this overview demonstrates that on average, mHealth interventions improve glycemic control (HbA1c) compared to standard care or other non-mHealth approaches by as much as 0.8% for patients with type 2 diabetes and 0.3% for patients with type 1 diabetes, at least in the short-term (≤12 months). However, limitations in the overall quality of evidence suggest that further research will likely have an important impact in these estimates of effect. CONCLUSIONS: Findings are consistent with clinically relevant improvements, particularly with respect to patients with type 2 diabetes. Similar to home telemonitoring, mHealth interventions represent a promising approach for self-management of diabetes.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0173160

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 25 references

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. KR Tuttle, 2014, Diabetic kidney disease: a report from an ADA Consensus Conference, Am J Kidney Dis, 64, 510, 10.1053/j.ajkd.2014.08.001 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 2016, 9. Microvascular Complications and Foot Care, Diabetes Care, 39, S72
  3. MA Powers, 2015, Diabetes self-management education and support in type 2 diabetes: a joint position statement of the American Diabetes Association, the American Association of Diabetes Educators, and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, Diabetes Educ, 41, 417, 10.1177/0145721715588904 · DOI · Paper page
  4. S Goyal, 2013, Mobile phone health apps for diabetes management: current evidence and future developments, QJM, 106, 1067, 10.1093/qjmed/hct203 · DOI
  5. S Kitsiou, 2013, Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of home telemonitoring interventions for patients with chronic diseases: a critical assessment of their methodological quality, J Med Internet Res, 15, e150, 10.2196/jmir.2770 · DOI · Paper page
  6. D Moher, 2009, Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement, PLoS medicine, 6, e1000097, 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · DOI · Paper page
  7. BJ Shea, 2009, AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews, J Clin Epidemiol, 62, 1013, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.009 · DOI · Paper page
  8. L Herbert, 2013, Text message interventions for children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: A systematic review, Diabetes Technology and Therapeutics, 15, 362, 10.1089/dia.2012.0291 · DOI
  9. K Pal, 2014, Computer-based interventions to improve self-management in adults with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Diabetes Care, 37, 1759, 10.2337/dc13-1386 · DOI · Paper page
  10. G Paré, 2016, Contextualizing the twin concepts of systematicity and transparency in information systems literature reviews, European Journal of Information Systems, 25, 493, 10.1057/s41303-016-0020-3 · DOI · Paper page
  11. J Pillay, 2015, Behavioral Programs for Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis, Ann Intern Med, 163, 836, 10.7326/M15-1399 · DOI · Paper page
  12. BS Gerber, 2007, Evaluation of an internet diabetes self-management training program for adolescents and young adults, Diabetes Technol Ther, 9, 60, 10.1089/dia.2006.0058 · DOI
  13. M Arnhold, 2014, Mobile applications for diabetics: a systematic review and expert-based usability evaluation considering the special requirements of diabetes patients age 50 years or older, J Med Internet Res, 16, e104, 10.2196/jmir.2968 · DOI · Paper page
  14. JY Breland, 2013, Adherence to evidence-based guidelines among diabetes self-management apps, Transl Behav Med, 3, 277, 10.1007/s13142-013-0205-4 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 388

Metadata

Authors
Kitsiou, S., Paré, G., Jaana, M., & Gerber, B.
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2017-03-01
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
e0173160
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2592651846
Cited by
388
References
25
FWCI
8.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effectiveness of mHealth interventions for patients with diabetes: An overview of systematic reviews. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0173160
The paper
Kitsiou, S., Paré, G., Jaana, M., & Gerber, B. (2017). Effectiveness of mHealth interventions for patients with diabetes: An overview of systematic reviews. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0173160

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.