Structured population data were available for 5 of 5 supporting studies. 3 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 4 studies described adult participants.

1 relevant study has unresolved authoritative design evidence and does not contribute to design-specific or RoB-specific claims.

1 supporting study does not have a displayable topic-matched quantitative effect.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: baseline_within_group, usual_care.

2 supporting studies have high, serious, critical, unclear, or unavailable risk-of-bias information.

Usual care

Core clinician-reference fields are available or not applicable.

Patients receiving SMS text messages aimed at supporting lifestyle behavior changes.

Intervention Group A

Intervention group A (patient SMS text messaging)

Patients receiving SMS text messages and health care professional training.

Intervention Group B

Intervention group B (patient SMS text messaging+health care professional web-based training)

Digital health intervention may improve engagement in prediabetes management

Available source content was suppressed because validation identified a conflict.

Usual Care

Participants received SMS messages up to four times a week targeting medication adherence.

SMS Messaging Intervention

Consenting participants were randomly allocated to receive short message system text messages up to four times a week, or usual care, for a period of 6 months; messages contained behavioural change techniques targeting medication use.

Participants received usual care without the SMS messaging intervention.

Participants were randomly allocated to receive Short Messaging System (SMS) text messaging alongside usual care or to usual care.

Authoritative quality diagnostic: invalid or missing unit.

Authoritative quality diagnostic: invalid or missing value.

SMS Messaging Improves Medication Adherence in Type 2 Diabetes

Not extracted from the authoritative source.

Not applicable to this study design or comparison.

Source evidence could not be resolved sufficiently for this field.

Clinician-reference record is usable with limitations in: design, arms, risk_of_bias.

Authoritative quality diagnostic: source evidence unresolved.

Text Messaging Improves Diabetes Management

Clinician-reference record is usable with limitations in: comparator.

Participants received culturally tailored and patient-vetted diabetes educational materials.

EM-alone

EM-alone participants received culturally tailored and patient-vetted diabetes EM.

Participants received motivational interviewing-based coaching from certified lay health coaches.

HC+EM

HC+EM participants received motivational interviewing–based coaching from certified lay health coaches.

Participants received personalized and tailored text messages.

TM+EM

TM+EM participants received personalized and tailored messages.

Text Messaging Improves Diabetes Self-Care More Than Educational Materials Alone

Standard Care

Patients participated in 6 monthly group visits either in person or online and a concurrent 25-week text messaging intervention.

Text Messaging Intervention with Group Visits

A TMI was implemented for 11 health centers participating in a cluster randomized study of diabetes GVs in Midwestern FQHCs targeting adults with T2DM. FQHC patients participated in 6 monthly GVs either in person or online and a concurrent 25-week TMI.

Patients received standard care without the text messaging intervention.

Text Messaging Improves Patient-Reported Outcomes in Diabetes Care

Structured population data were available for 3 of 3 supporting studies. 1 study described participants with type 2 diabetes. 3 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 3 of 3 supporting studies. 2 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 3 studies described adult participants.

1 study contains conflicting p-value and significance fields; those significance claims are suppressed.

Structured population data were available for 4 of 4 supporting studies. 3 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 4 studies described adult participants.

Upstream consistency scoring indicates mixed findings across the evidence.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, usual_care.

Structured population data were available for 8 of 8 supporting studies. 4 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 8 studies described adult participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: baseline_within_group, unknown_unresolved, usual_care.

2 supporting studies do not have a displayable topic-matched quantitative effect.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, unknown_unresolved.

3 supporting studies have high, serious, critical, unclear, or unavailable risk-of-bias information.

Structured population data were available for 4 of 4 supporting studies. 4 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 4 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 5 of 5 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 2 studies with type 1 diabetes, 1 studies with type 2 diabetes. Age groups were heterogeneous: 2 studies with adult participants, 1 studies with youth participants.

2 relevant studies have unresolved authoritative design evidence and do not contribute to design-specific or RoB-specific claims.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: baseline_within_group, other, usual_care.

4 of 5 studies with duration data have follow-up of 12 weeks or less.

Structured population data were available for 10 of 11 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 5 studies with type 2 diabetes, 2 studies with type 1 diabetes. 8 studies described adult participants.

3 relevant studies have unresolved authoritative design evidence and do not contribute to design-specific or RoB-specific claims.

3 supporting studies do not have a displayable topic-matched quantitative effect.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, baseline_within_group, placebo, unknown_unresolved, usual_care.

1 supporting study lacks usable structured population information.

4 supporting studies have high, serious, critical, unclear, or unavailable risk-of-bias information.

Structured population data were available for 8 of 8 supporting studies. 7 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 7 studies described adult participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, baseline_within_group, placebo.

1 supporting study has high, serious, critical, unclear, or unavailable risk-of-bias information.

Structured population data were available for 4 of 4 supporting studies. 4 studies described participants with type 1 diabetes. 2 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 8 of 8 supporting studies. 6 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 7 studies described adult participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, unknown_unresolved, usual_care.

Structured population data were available for 8 of 8 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 4 studies with type 2 diabetes, 1 studies with type 1 diabetes. Age groups were heterogeneous: 4 studies with adult participants, 1 studies with youth participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, placebo, usual_care.

5 of 8 studies with duration data have follow-up of 12 weeks or less.

Structured population data were available for 3 of 3 supporting studies. 3 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 3 studies described adult participants.

3 of 3 studies with duration data have follow-up of 12 weeks or less.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, placebo.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, baseline_within_group.

Structured population data were available for 3 of 3 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 1 studies with type 1 diabetes, 1 studies with type 2 diabetes. 2 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 13 of 13 supporting studies. 11 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 12 studies described adult participants.

4 relevant studies have unresolved authoritative design evidence and do not contribute to design-specific or RoB-specific claims.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, baseline_within_group, usual_care.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: unknown_unresolved, usual_care.

Structured population data were available for 3 of 3 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 2 studies with type 2 diabetes, 1 studies with type 1 diabetes. Age groups were heterogeneous: 2 studies with adult participants, 1 studies with youth participants.

Structured population data were available for 12 of 12 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 9 studies with type 2 diabetes, 1 studies with type 1 diabetes. 12 studies described adult participants.

9 supporting studies have high, serious, critical, unclear, or unavailable risk-of-bias information.

Structured population data were available for 5 of 5 supporting studies. 5 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 4 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 3 of 3 supporting studies. 2 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 2 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 2 of 3 supporting studies. 2 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 2 studies described adult participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, placebo, unknown_unresolved.

Structured population data were available for 10 of 10 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 8 studies with type 2 diabetes, 2 studies with type 1 diabetes. Age groups were heterogeneous: 8 studies with adult participants, 1 studies with youth participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, other, usual_care.

3 studies contain conflicting p-value and significance fields; those significance claims are suppressed.

Structured population data were available for 4 of 4 supporting studies. 2 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 4 studies described adult participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: other, usual_care.

2 of 4 studies with duration data have follow-up of 12 weeks or less.

Structured population data were available for 4 of 4 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 2 studies with type 2 diabetes, 1 studies with type 1 diabetes. 4 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 5 of 5 supporting studies. 5 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 5 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 11 of 11 supporting studies. 10 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 11 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 6 of 6 supporting studies. 6 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 6 studies described adult participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, baseline_within_group, unknown_unresolved, usual_care.

Structured population data were available for 7 of 7 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 2 studies with type 2 diabetes, 1 studies with type 1 diabetes. 5 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 5 of 5 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 4 studies with type 2 diabetes, 1 studies with type 1 diabetes. 3 studies described adult participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: baseline_within_group, placebo, usual_care.

SMS text messaging behavioral intervention for health promotion × HbA1c

Available supporting studies

Digital health intervention may improve engagement in prediabetes management

SMS Messaging Improves Medication Adherence in Type 2 Diabetes

Text Messaging Improves Diabetes Management

Text Messaging Improves Diabetes Self-Care More Than Educational Materials Alone

Text Messaging Improves Patient-Reported Outcomes in Diabetes Care