Cited by 44Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsPhysical Activity and HealthDiabetes Management and Research

Efficiency of an mHealth App and Chest-Wearable Remote Exercise Monitoring Intervention in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Prospective, Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Li, Jing, Wei, Dong, Liu, Shuyi, Li, Mingxia, Chen, Xi, Chen, Li, Wu, Yuelei, Zhou, Wen +4 more·2021·JMIR mhealth and uhealth

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Exercise has been recommended as a cornerstone for diabetes management. Supervised exercise is more efficient than unsupervised exercise but is less convenient and accessible. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the efficiency of exercise using a fitness app and heart rate band to remotely monitor patients with type 2 diabetes in comparison with that of traditional exercise. METHODS: Patients with type 2 diabetes without severe complications or comorbidities were recruited to participate in this multicenter randomized controlled trial and were allocated to either the intervention or control group (1:1 ratio). Participants in both groups were asked to engage in moderate to vigorous physical activity for at least 150 minutes per week; each participant was prescribed individualized exercises. Participants in the intervention group were asked to follow exercise videos on the app and to wear a chest band; heart rate, exercise duration, and exercise intensity were recorded by the app. Participants in the control group self-reported exercise intensity and duration. Cardiopulmonary endurance, body composition, blood glucose level, and insulin level were assessed before and after a 3-month exercise program. RESULTS: Of the 101 participants who were enrolled, the majority of them (85/101, 84.2%) completed the study. Both groups had similar baseline characteristics, with the exception that participants in the intervention group were slightly younger and less likely to have hypertension. Self-reported exercise duration was longer than app-recorded exercise duration (control: mean 214 minutes/week; intervention: mean 193 minutes/week); in addition, a higher proportion of participants in the control group (29/41, 71%) than in the intervention group (18/44, 41%) met the 150-minute target for moderate to vigorous physical activity. However, compared with the control group, the intervention group had a larger increase in cardiopulmonary endurance (mean difference -2.0 bpm [beats per minute] vs 1.0 bpm; P=.02) and a larger decrease in body fat percentage (mean difference -1.8% vs -0.8%; P=.01). There was no difference in hemoglobin A1c level reduction between the two groups, yet more participants in the intervention group stopped taking their antidiabetic drugs or had their dosages lowered by an endocrinologist, compared with those in the control group. There were no serious adverse events in either group. CONCLUSIONS: This was the first randomized controlled trial in China, to our knowledge, to test the efficiency of exercise using a fitness app and heart rate band to remotely monitor prescribed exercise in patients with type 2 diabetes. The findings of our study suggest that exercise programs may be more efficient if participants are remotely monitored with an app and heart rate band than if participants are not monitored. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Register ChiCTR1800015963; http://www.chictr.org.cn/showprojen.aspx?proj=27080.

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 · 10.2196/23338

Cites

32 of 32 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?

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
Li, J., Wei, D., Liu, S., Li, M., Chen, X., Chen, L., Wu, Y., Zhou, W., Ouyang, L., Tan, C., Meng, H., & Tong, N.
Affiliations
  • West China Hospital of Sichuan University (CN)
  • Sichuan University (CN)
  • Chengdu Second People's Hospital (CN)
  • University of South Florida (US)
Corresponding author
Tong, Nanwei
Venue
JMIR mhealth and uhealth
Published
2021-02-09
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
e23338
ISSN
2291-5222 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3119573168
Cited by
44
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1
FWCI
7.02
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)
Funders
  • Department of Science and Technology of Sichuan Province
  • West China Hospital, Sichuan University (ZYGD 18017)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, remote exercise monitoring, mobile health apps, wearable heart rate monitor, supervised exercise, cardiorespiratory fitness, body composition, HbA1c, antidiabetic medication reduction, physical activity adherence, exercise intensity and duration, diabetes management, China, insulin, blood glucose, body fat percentage, exercise videos, digital health
MeSH terms
Wearable Electronic Devices, China, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Humans, Prospective Studies, Exercise, Telemedicine, 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