Cited by 83Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDiabetes Management and EducationDiabetes Management and Research

Efficacy of Personalized Diabetes Self-care Using an Electronic Medical Record–Integrated Mobile App in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: 6-Month Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Lee, Eun Young, Cha, Seon-Ah, Yun, Jae-Seung, Lim, Sun-Young, Lee, Jin-Hee, Ahn, Yu-Bae, Yoon, Kun-Ho, Hyun, Min Kyung +1 more·2022·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract

Background: A system that combines technology and web-based coaching can help treat chronic conditions such as diabetes. However, the effectiveness of apps in mobile health (mHealth) interventions is inconclusive and unclear due to heterogeneous interventions and varying follow-up durations. In addition, randomized controlled trial data are limited, and long-term follow-up is lacking, especially for apps integrated into electronic medical records. Objective: We aimed to assess the effect of an electronic medical record–integrated mobile app for personalized diabetes self-care, focusing on the self-monitoring of blood glucose and lifestyle modifications, on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods: In a 26-week, 3-arm, randomized, controlled, open-label, parallel group trial, patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and a hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level of ≥7.5% were recruited. The mHealth intervention consisted of self-monitoring of blood glucose with the automatic transfer of glucose, diet, and physical activity counseling data (iCareD system). Participants were randomly assigned to the following three groups: usual care (UC), mobile diabetes self-care (MC), and MC with personalized, bidirectional feedback from physicians (MPC). The primary outcome was the change in HbA1c levels at 26 weeks. In addition, diabetes-related self-efficacy, self-care activities, and satisfaction with the iCareD system were assessed after the intervention. Results: A total of 269 participants were enrolled, and 234 patients (86.9%) remained in the study at 26 weeks. At 12 weeks after the intervention, the mean decline in HbA1c levels was significantly different among the 3 groups (UC vs MC vs MPC: −0.49% vs −0.86% vs −1.04%; P=.02). The HbA1c level decreased in all groups; however, it did not differ among groups after 26 weeks. In a subgroup analysis, HbA1c levels showed a statistically significant decrease after the intervention in the MPC group compared with the change in the UC or MC group, especially in patients aged <65 years (P=.02), patients with a diabetes duration of ≥10 years (P=.02), patients with a BMI of ≥25.0 kg/m2 (P=.004), patients with a C-peptide level of ≥0.6 ng/mL (P=.008), and patients who did not undergo treatment with insulin (P=.004) at 12 weeks. A total of 87.2% (137/157) of the participants were satisfied with the iCareD system. Conclusions: The mHealth intervention for diabetes self-care showed short-term efficacy in glycemic control, and the effect decreased over time. The participants were comfortable with using the iCareD system and exhibited high adherence. Trial Registration: Clinical Research Information Service, Republic of Korea KCT0004128; https://tinyurl.com/bdd6pa9m

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 · 10.2196/37430

Cites

42 of 42 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
Lee, E. Y., Cha, S.-A., Yun, J.-S., Lim, S.-Y., Lee, J.-H., Ahn, Y.-B., Yoon, K.-H., Hyun, M. K., & Ko, S.-H.
Affiliations
  • The Catholic University of Korea Seoul St. Mary's Hospital (KR)
  • Wonkwang University Sanbon Hospital (KR)
  • The Catholic University of Korea St. Vincent's Hospital (KR)
  • Catholic University of Korea (KR)
  • Dongguk University WISE (KR)
Corresponding author
Ko, Seung-Hyun
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2022-07-28
Volume
24
Issue
7
Pages
e37430
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4288719290
Cited by
83
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 1
FWCI
16.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Korea Health Industry Development Institute (HI19C0784)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, mobile health, diabetes self-care, electronic health record integration, personalized feedback, physician feedback, glycemic control, HbA1c, self-monitoring of blood glucose, diabetes self-efficacy, lifestyle modification, older adults, C-peptide, physical activity counseling, nutrition counseling, user satisfaction, long-term follow-up
MeSH terms
Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Humans, Self Care, Electronic Health Records, 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