Cited by 306Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDiabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Management and Education

Diabetes Digital App Technology: Benefits, Challenges, and Recommendations. A Consensus Report by the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) Diabetes Technology Working Group

Open access
Fleming, G. Alexander, Petrie, John R., Bergenstal, Richard M., Holl, Reinhard W., Peters, Anne L., Heinemann, Lutz·2020·Diabetes Care

Abstract

Digital health technology, especially digital and health applications (“apps”), have been developing rapidly to help people manage their diabetes. Numerous health-related apps provided on smartphones and other wireless devices are available to support people with diabetes who need to adopt either lifestyle interventions or medication adjustments in response to glucose-monitoring data. However, regulations and guidelines have not caught up with the burgeoning field to standardize how mobile health apps are reviewed and monitored for patient safety and clinical validity. The available evidence on the safety and effectiveness of mobile health apps, especially for diabetes, remains limited. The European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) have therefore conducted a joint review of the current landscape of available diabetes digital health technology (only stand-alone diabetes apps, as opposed to those that are integral to a regulated medical device, such as insulin pumps, continuous glucose monitoring systems, and automated insulin delivery systems) and practices of regulatory authorities and organizations. We found that, across the U.S. and Europe, mobile apps intended to manage health and wellness are largely unregulated unless they meet the definition of medical devices for therapeutic and/or diagnostic purposes. International organizations, including the International Medical Device Regulators Forum and the World Health Organization, have made strides in classifying different types of digital health technology and integrating digital health technology into the field of medical devices. As the diabetes digital health field continues to develop and become more fully integrated into everyday life, we wish to ensure that it is based on the best evidence for safety and efficacy. As a result, we bring to light several issues that the diabetes community, including regulatory authorities, policy makers, professional organizations, researchers, people with diabetes, and health care professionals, needs to address to ensure that diabetes health technology can meet its full potential. These issues range from inadequate evidence on app accuracy and clinical validity to lack of training provision, poor interoperability and standardization, and insufficient data security. We conclude with a series of recommended actions to resolve some of these shortcomings.

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 · 10.2337/dci19-0062

Cites

40 of 40 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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. 12 American Association of Diabetes Educators. AADE7 self-care behaviours. Diabetes Educ . 2008;34:445-449.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fleming, G. A., Petrie, J. R., Bergenstal, R. M., Holl, R. W., Peters, A. L., & Heinemann, L.
Affiliations
  • Kinexum, Harpers Ferry, WV
  • University of Glasgow (GB)
  • Park Nicollet Health Services (US)
  • Universität Ulm (DE)
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • Science-Consulting in Diabetes GmbH, Neuss, Germany
Corresponding author
Fleming, G. Alexander
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2019-12-12
Volume
43
Issue
1
Pages
250-260
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2994039809
Cited by
306
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 59 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
43.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion, 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 Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
diabetes apps, mobile health, digital health technologies, diabetes self-management, medical device regulation, clinical validity, interoperability, data security, patient safety, regulatory standards, health technology policy
MeSH terms
Smartphone, Blood Glucose, Computers, Diabetes Mellitus, Endocrinology, Europe, Humans, Insulin, Insulin Infusion Systems, Monitoring, Physiologic, Societies, Medical, United States, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring, Inventions, 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