Last updated August 29, 2026
Key finding
The proportion of participants who underwent laboratory check-ups (HbA1c 20.3%-64.4%; p < 0.01)
A multi-component Diabetes Program including a mobile app, clinical decision support tool, and text messaging intervention.
Quick read
The essential study design details in one scan.
EvidenceScore™
Moderate
Study type
Non-randomized CT
Follow-up
Long-Term (1–5 y)
Risk of bias
High Risk
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
A multi-component Diabetes Program including a mobile app, clinical decision support tool, and text messaging intervention.
This study evaluated A multi-component Diabetes Program including a mobile app, clinical decision support tool, and text messaging intervention.
Limitations were not clearly described in the extracted text.
Published in
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Daniela MM, Fernando R, Marilina S, et al. Digital health interventions to improve diabetes care in a vulnerable population in Argentina. BMC Health Services Research. 2023;23:101. doi:10.1186/s12913-023-09082-7
Evidence network
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
This study contributes evidence to Peer-support lifestyle program and Proportion of participants achieving HbA1c < 6.5%, Proportion of participants maintaining systolic blood pressure < 130 mmHg, Proportion of participants who underwent foot exams, and 1 more.
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
Peer-support lifestyle program
Primary outcomes
Evidence topics
Primary intervention
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
246
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.
Peer-support lifestyle program → Proportion of participants achieving HbA1c < 6.5%
Peer-support lifestyle program → Proportion of participants achieving HbA1c < 6.5%
Peer-support lifestyle program → Proportion of participants maintaining systolic blood pressure < 130 mmHg
Peer-support lifestyle program → Proportion of participants maintaining systolic blood pressure < 130 mmHg
Peer-support lifestyle program → Proportion of participants who underwent foot exams
Peer-support lifestyle program → Proportion of participants who underwent foot exams
Peer-support lifestyle program → Proportion of poor control
Peer-support lifestyle program → Proportion of poor control
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 Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) Programs and Proportion of participants achieving HbA1c < 6.5%, Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) Programs and Proportion of participants maintaining systolic blood pressure < 130 mmHg.
This study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.
Behavioral & Lifestyle
Behavioral & Lifestyle
Curated evidence collections and hubs this study is part of.
All studies on Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) Programs
Contributes to Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) Programs evidence base.
All studies measuring Proportion of participants achieving HbA1c < 6.5%
Measures Proportion of participants achieving HbA1c < 6.5% as a key outcome.
All studies measuring Proportion of participants maintaining systolic blood pressure < 130 mmHg
Measures Proportion of participants maintaining systolic blood pressure < 130 mmHg as a key outcome.
Jump to pre-filtered views in Evidence Explorer.
1 results
1 results
1 results
1 results
1 results
Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.
Peer-support lifestyle program appears to improve proportion of participants achieving HbA1c < 6.5%.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Proportion of participants achieving HbA1c < 6.5%
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 56.3 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Peer-support lifestyle program appears to improve proportion of participants maintaining systolic blood pressure < 130 mmhg.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Proportion of participants maintaining systolic blood pressure < 130 mmHg
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 56.3 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Peer-support lifestyle program appears to improve proportion of participants who underwent foot exams.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Proportion of participants who underwent foot exams
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 56.3 | 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 Peer-support lifestyle program for proportion of poor control.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Proportion of poor control
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 56.3 | 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.
