StrongDecrease
Blood glucose
Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring → Blood glucose
Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring → Blood glucose
Evidence profile
StrongDecreaseGlycemic Control
Unlock full evidence details
Research Summary
Telemedicine improves diabetes control.
Key finding
At 6 months, the unadjusted mean HbA1c values were 7.38% for the intervention group and 7.98% for the control group (P < 0.001).
This study evaluated the impact of telemedicine-assisted structured self-monitoring of blood glucose on glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes, finding significant improvements in HbA1c and other metrics.
Evidence strength
Moderate confidence
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Medium-Term (3–12 mo)
Some Concerns bias
Last updated July 8, 2026Quick read
Study at a glance
The essential study design details in one scan.
Population
Young Adult (19–39), Middle Aged (40-64), Male, Female, Asia-Pacific (APAC), with T2 Diabetes
Intervention
Telemedicine-assisted structured self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM)
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Medium-Term (3–12 mo)
Primary outcome
Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c)
Comparator
Traditional blood glucose meter
Plain-language summary
What this paper says
A plain-language read of the study's main message and where it applies.
Study focus
This study evaluated the impact of telemedicine-assisted structured self-monitoring of blood glucose on glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes, finding significant improvements in HbA1c and other metrics.
Clinical relevance
Improving glycemic control is crucial for reducing the risk of diabetes-related complications. This study suggests that telemedicine can enhance self-monitoring practices, potentially leading to better health outcomes for individuals with type 2 diabetes.
Keep in mind
The study may have limited generalizability due to specific population characteristics. Potential biases in self-reported measures could affect outcome validity. The duration of the study may not capture long-term effects.
Published in
Journal Reference
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Chen-Yu H, Jian Z, Xiao-Mei Y, et al. Telemedicine-assisted structured self-monitoring of blood glucose improves glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making. 2023;23:182. doi:10.1186/s12911-023-02283-4
Save this study and add notes to your research library.
Main Effects
The intervention group had a 0.6% reduction in HbA1c (P < 0.001).
LBGI decreased by 0.5 in the intervention group (P = 0.03).
DMSQ score increased by 1.04 in the intervention group (P < 0.001).
Evidence network
How this study fits
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
Evidence Context
This study contributes evidence to Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring, Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) and Blood glucose, Diabetes self-management behaviors, HbA1c.
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring
Primary outcomes
- Blood glucose
- Diabetes self-management behaviors
- HbA1c
Evidence topics
Primary intervention
Primary outcomes
Evidence relationships
Intervention and outcome relationships this study adds to the evidence network.
6
Evidence pairs
6
Relationships
3
Evidence topics
contributes_evidence
Editorial context
Why this study matters
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.
Moderate contributionModerate confidenceNetwork score: 68
3
Related topics
6
Evidence pairs
315
Related studies
High relevance in at least one topic
Why it is useful
- Contributes to 6 evidence relationships
- Includes primary outcome data
- Linked to 3 direct semantic evidence topics
Topic contributions
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Core evidence
Study findings
The primary outcomes reported in this study.
StrongIncrease
Diabetes self-management behaviors
Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring → Diabetes self-management behaviors
Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring → Diabetes self-management behaviors
Evidence profile
StrongIncreaseAdherence & Engagement
Unlock full evidence details
StrongDecrease
HbA1c
Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring → HbA1c
Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring → HbA1c
Evidence profile
StrongDecreaseGlycemic Control
Unlock full evidence details
NoneNo Change
Blood glucose
Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) → Blood glucose
Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) → Blood glucose
Evidence profile
NoneNo ChangeGlycemic Control
Unlock full evidence details
NoneNo Change
Diabetes self-management behaviors
Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) → Diabetes self-management behaviors
Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) → Diabetes self-management behaviors
Evidence profile
NoneNo ChangeAdherence & Engagement
Unlock full evidence details
NoneNo Change
HbA1c
Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) → HbA1c
Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) → HbA1c
Evidence profile
NoneNo ChangeGlycemic Control
Unlock full evidence details
Unlock full evidence analysis
Create a free account to access effectiveness ratings, evidence strength and depth scores, consistency analysis, and direct links to all supporting studies.
Evidence Suggest
- Intervention group showed a significant 0.6% reduction in HbA1c levels.
- LBGI decreased significantly by 0.5 in the intervention group.
- DMSQ scores improved by 1.04 in the intervention group.
Who this applies to
- Adults diagnosed with type 2 diabetes.
- Individuals interested in improving their diabetes self-management.
Keep in Mind
- Results may not apply to all demographics or settings.
- Further research is needed to confirm long-term benefits.
- Self-monitoring practices may vary widely among individuals.
Between the Lines
- The study may have limited generalizability due to specific population characteristics.
- Potential biases in self-reported measures could affect outcome validity.
- The duration of the study may not capture long-term effects.
Unlock Full Analysis
Create a free account to unlock the bias score, detailed effectiveness analysis, and clinical outcomes for this study.
Already have an account?
Connected Evidence
Explore related studies, evidence collections, and research questions.
This study contributes to evidence on Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring and Fasting Glucose, Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring and Diabetes Management Self-Efficacy.
Related evidence relationships
Explore in Evidence ArchiveThis study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.
Included in these evidence collections
Curated evidence collections and hubs this study is part of.
Diabetes Management Self-Efficacy Evidence Hub
All studies measuring Diabetes Management Self-Efficacy
1 studies
outcome_hubMeasures Diabetes Management Self-Efficacy as a key outcome.
Fasting Glucose Evidence Hub
All studies measuring Fasting Glucose
1 studies
outcome_hubMeasures Fasting Glucose as a key outcome.
Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring Evidence Hub
All studies on Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring
1 studies
intervention_hubContributes to Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring evidence base.
Explore more in the evidence archive
Jump to pre-filtered views in the evidence archive.
All studies on Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring and Blood glucose
Intervention: Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoringOutcome: Blood glucose
1 results
All studies on Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring and Diabetes self-management behaviors
Intervention: Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoringOutcome: Diabetes self-management behaviors
1 results
All studies on Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring
Intervention: Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring
1 results
All studies measuring Blood glucose
Outcome: Blood glucose
1 results
All studies measuring Diabetes self-management behaviors
Outcome: Diabetes self-management behaviors
1 results
Questions answered by this study
Does Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring improve blood glucose?
Emerging Evidence
Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring appears to improve Blood glucose.
ConsensusScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
- 1
Blood glucose
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 51.7 | strong positive | ConsensusScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
- Only one supporting study is available.
- Consistency cannot yet be determined.
- Population details are unavailable.
Does Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring improve diabetes self-management behaviors?
Emerging Evidence
Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring appears to improve Diabetes self-management behaviors.
ConsensusScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
- 1
Diabetes self-management behaviors
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 51.7 | strong positive | ConsensusScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
- Only one supporting study is available.
- Consistency cannot yet be determined.
- Population details are unavailable.
Does Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring improve HbA1c?
Emerging Evidence
Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring may improve HbA1c.
ConsensusScore™: Results are mixed and should be interpreted cautiously.
Evidence caveat: The available evidence reports mixed findings.
Ranked evidence signals
- 1
HbA1c
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 47.1 | moderate positive | ConsensusScore™ Mixed | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is cautious because the available studies report mixed findings.
Limitations
- Only one supporting study is available.
- Population details are unavailable.
Does Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) improve blood glucose?
Limited Evidence
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) for Blood glucose.
ConsensusScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
- 1
Blood glucose
EvidenceScore™ Limited | EvidenceScore™ 34.2 | neutral | ConsensusScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
- Only one supporting study is available.
- Consistency cannot yet be determined.
- Population details are unavailable.
Next steps
Continue your research
Choose a next path through related evidence topics, archive views, and research summaries.
Evidence topics
Follow the topics this study contributes to.
Explore in archive
Open broader archive views for this relationship.
All studies on Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring and HbA1cAll studies on Traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) and HbA1cAll studies on Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring and Blood glucoseAll studies on Standard care with capillary blood glucose monitoring and Diabetes self-management behaviors
Related research
Read related research summaries.
Telemedicine improves glucose control in nursing home residents with diabetes.HRS-7535 improves glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetesNatural products may improve glycemic control in type 2 diabetesNewer diabetes drugs show stronger weight and blood sugar benefits in prediabetesGLP-1 agonists reduce heart fat thickness in diabetes.
No ads. No tracking.
Focused on evidence, not advertising.
Secure & private
Your data is always protected.
Always up to date
New studies added every day.