Clinical evidence dossier
Mobile app for diabetes self-management
Diabetes self-management behaviors
Evidence signal
Authoritative evidence signal
strong
This is an authoritative evidence signal supplied by Clinical Reference. It is not a formal clinical grade, treatment recommendation, or pooled effect estimate.
Evidence snapshot
- Authoritative support records
- 4
- Supporting studies available for review
- 4
- Randomized trials
- 3
- Reported effects
- 3
Clinical conclusion
Mobile app for diabetes self-management shows a strong positive evidence signal for improving Diabetes self-management behaviors across the studied comparisons.
Observed effects
Evidence composition
- Non-randomized studies
- 0
- Other designs
- 0
- Unresolved designs
- 1
- Magnitude-eligible effects
- 0
Consistency
Authoritative consistency classification
consistent
- Positive
- 4
- No effect
- 0
- Mixed
- 0
- Negative
- 0
Population and applicability
Structured population data were available for 4 of 4 supporting studies. 1 study described participants with type 2 diabetes. 3 studies described adult participants.
This population information refers to the materialized supporting studies available for review. Omitted support records remain part of the authoritative support accounting and are available through the audit experience.
View reported population descriptions
These descriptions are reported across the supporting studies; they are not a single synthesized population.
- Individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorders.
- Patients at risk for diabetes or with existing diabetes management challenges.
- Young Adult (19–39)
- Middle Aged (40-64)
- Male
- Female
- with T2 Diabetes
- Adults diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes.
- Individuals seeking to improve their diabetes self-management.
Limitations
- 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.
- 1 supporting study has high, serious, critical, unclear, or unavailable risk-of-bias information.
- 2 of 4 studies with duration data have follow-up of 12 weeks or less.
Supporting evidence
Inspect the authoritative studies and omitted support records for this dossier.