Cited by 29Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDiabetes Management and EducationDigital Mental Health Interventions

A Comparison of Functional Features in Chinese and US Mobile Apps for Diabetes Self-Management: A Systematic Search in App Stores and Content Analysis

Open access
Wu, Yuan, Zhou, Yiling, Wang, Xuan, Zhang, Qi, Yao, Xun, Li, Xiaodan, Li, Jianshu, Tian, Haoming +1 more·2019·JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mobile health interventions are widely used for self-management of diabetes, which is one of the most burdensome noncommunicable chronic diseases worldwide. However, little is known about the distribution of characteristics and functions of in-store mobile apps for diabetes. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the distribution of characteristics and functions of the in-store mobile apps for self-management of diabetes in the United States and China using a predefined functional taxonomy, which was developed and published in our previous study. METHODS: We identified apps by searching diabetes in English or Chinese in the Apple iTunes Store and Android Markets (both in the United States and China) and included apps for diabetes self-management. We examined the validity and reliability of the predefined functional taxonomy with 3 dimensions: clinical module, functional module, and potential risk. We then classified all functions in the included apps according to the predefined taxonomy and compared the differences in the features of these apps between the United States and China. RESULTS: We included 171 mobile diabetes apps, with 133 from the United States and 38 from China. Apps from both countries faced the challenges of evidence-based information, proper risk assessment, and declaration, especially Chinese apps. More Chinese apps provide app-based communication functions (general communication: Chinese vs US apps, 39%, 15/38 vs 18.0%, 24/133; P=.006 and patient-clinician communication: Chinese vs US apps, 68%, 26/38 vs 6.0%, 8/133; P<.001), whereas more US apps provide the decision-making module (Chinese vs US apps, 0%, 0/38 vs 23.3%, 31/133; P=.001), which is a high-risk module. Both complication prevention (Chinese vs US apps, 8%, 3/38 vs 3.8%, 5/133; P=.50) and psychological care (Chinese vs US apps, 0%, 0/38 vs 0.8%, 1/133; P>.99) are neglected by the 2 countries. CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of characteristics and functions of in-store mobile apps for diabetes self-management in the United States was different from China. The design of in-store diabetes apps needs to be monitored closely.

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 · 10.2196/13971

Cites

27 of 27 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?

  • To utilize these types of BCTs, interventions usually included features such as self-monitoring of blood glucose, exercise, and diet; educational materials; and patient-healthcare provider communication.

    “To utilize these types of BCTs, interventions usually included features such as self-monitoring of blood glucose, exercise, and diet; educational materials; and patient–healthcare provider communication.10,13,27”

    From Effective behavioral change techniques in m-health app supported interventions for glycemic control among patients with type 2 diabetes: A meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis of randomized controlled trials (2025) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Results (Functions and Modules; page not provided) report that recording activity and diet was common in the Chinese and US diabetes apps studied. The Introduction lists monitoring, education, and communication as app-function categories, but the paper does not establish that interventions usually combined these features to use particular BCTs. Patient–clinician communication appeared in 68% of Chinese apps but only 6% of US apps, so it was not a usual feature across both groups. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Wu, Y., Zhou, Y., Wang, X., Zhang, Q., Yao, X., Li, X., Li, J., Tian, H., & Li, S.
Affiliations
  • Sichuan University (CN)
  • University of Dundee (GB)
  • Uppsala University (SE)
  • Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
Corresponding author
Li, Sheyu
Venue
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
Published
2019-08-28
Volume
7
Issue
8
Pages
e13971
ISSN
2291-5222 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2955750828
Cited by
29
References
27
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4
FWCI
5.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR mhealth and uhealth (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
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
diabetes self-management, mobile health apps, app store search, functional classification, cross-national comparison, China, United States, patient-clinician communication, decision-making module, complication prevention, psychological care, evidence-based health information
MeSH terms
Self-Management, China, Diabetes Mellitus, Humans, United States, Reproducibility of Results, 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