Last updated September 9, 2026
Key finding
BTG group showed a reduction of 2.23% at Week 12 (p < 0.001).
This study evaluated the effectiveness of Bluetooth-enabled glucometers compared to traditional glucometers in telehealth insulin titration for diabetes management, finding significant reductions in HbA1c levels.
Quick read
The essential study design details in one scan.
EvidenceScore™
Moderate
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Medium-Term (3–12 mo)
Risk of bias
Some Concerns
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Plain-language summary
A plain-language read of the study’s main message and where it applies.
Study focus
This study evaluated the effectiveness of Bluetooth-enabled glucometers compared to traditional glucometers in telehealth insulin titration for diabetes management, finding significant reductions in HbA1c levels.
These findings are significant for diabetes management, as they suggest that incorporating technology like Bluetooth-enabled glucometers can lead to better glycemic control and reduce healthcare utilization. This could enhance patient outcomes and lower the burden on healthcare systems.
Limited generalizability due to specific population characteristics. Potential confounding factors not controlled for in the study. Short follow-up duration may not capture long-term effects.
Published in
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Xia L, Hui LL, Ying SL, et al. Effectiveness of Bluetooth-Enabled Glucometers in Telehealth Insulin Titration for Diabetes Management. Frontiers in Endocrinology. 2025;16:1724811. doi:10.3389/fendo.2025.1724811
BTG group showed a 2.23% reduction in HbA1c at Week 12 (p < 0.001).
TG group showed a 2.8% reduction in HbA1c at Week 12 (p < 0.001).
BTG group had 4.1% emergency department visits compared to 16.7% in TG (p = 0.039).
Evidence network
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
This study contributes evidence to Bluetooth-enabled glucometers (BTG), Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) and Diabetes distress scores, Emergency department visits, HbA1c.
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
Bluetooth-enabled glucometers (BTG)
Primary outcomes
Evidence topics
Primary intervention
Primary outcomes
Intervention and outcome relationships this study adds to the evidence network.
Editorial context
See why this paper is useful beyond its individual results.
Evidence network role
This section describes how the study fits into the current evidence network. It does not determine whether an intervention works on its own.
2
Related topics
4
Evidence pairs
581
Related studies
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Save studies and evidence pages, organize your personal Evidence Tracker, and keep the research you care about in one place.
Primary evidence
Evidence topic
matched_outcome
Related evidence
Evidence topic
Save evidence
Core evidence
The primary outcomes reported in this study.
Bluetooth-enabled glucometers (BTG) → Diabetes distress scores
Bluetooth-enabled glucometers (BTG) → Diabetes distress scores
Bluetooth-enabled glucometers (BTG) → Emergency department visits
Bluetooth-enabled glucometers (BTG) → Emergency department visits
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Explore related studies, evidence collections, and research questions.
Relationships organized using the Dediabetes Evidence Intelligence™ framework.
This study contributes to evidence on Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) and HbA1c, Bluetooth-enabled glucometers (BTG) and Diabetes Distress Measures.
This study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.
Devices & Technology
Devices & Technology
Curated evidence collections and hubs this study is part of.
All studies measuring HbA1c
Measures HbA1c as a key outcome.
All studies on Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM)
Contributes to Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) evidence base.
All studies on Bluetooth-enabled glucometers (BTG)
Contributes to Bluetooth-enabled glucometers (BTG) evidence base.
All studies measuring Diabetes Distress Measures
Measures Diabetes Distress Measures as a key outcome.
Latest published studies
Published within the last 2 years.
Jump to pre-filtered views in Evidence Explorer.
2 results
1 results
2 results
1 results
2 results
Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.
Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) may lower HbA1c.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are mixed and should be interpreted cautiously.
Ranked evidence signals
HbA1c
EvidenceScore™ Moderate | EvidenceScore™ 69.0 | moderate positive | ConsistencyScore™ Mixed | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is cautious because the available studies report mixed findings.
Limitations
Bluetooth-enabled glucometers (BTG) appears to improve emergency department visits.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Emergency department visits
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Bluetooth-enabled glucometers (BTG) appears to lower HbA1c.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
HbA1c
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Bluetooth-enabled glucometers (BTG) for diabetes distress scores.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Diabetes distress scores
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Next steps
Choose a next path through related evidence topics, Evidence Explorer views, and research summaries.
Follow the topics this study contributes to.
Open broader Evidence Explorer views for this relationship.
Read related research summaries.
Focused on evidence, not advertising.
Your data is always protected.
New studies added every day.
