Skip to main content
. 2017 May 31;11(5):1015–1027. doi: 10.1177/1932296817713506

Table 3.

Intervention Features of Studies With Significant A1c Outcomes (n = 18).

Review Intervention features A1cc
Authora,b Communication (1- or 2-way) Patient-generated health data (tracking or analysis) Education content (general or customized) Feedback (automated or live)
Garabedian 2 Analysis Both Automated −0.8% decreased
Cui 2 Analysis Both Both −0.4% diff
Alharbi 2 Both Both Both −0.5% diff
Bonotob 2 Both Both Both −0.4% diff P < .001
Greenwood 2 Both Both Both −0.2 to −1.2 rangee
Hou 2 Both None Both −0.5% diff
Kuo Both Both Both Both −0.5% diff
Palb Both Both Both Both −0.2% diff P = .009
Mobile:
−0.5% diff P < .00001
Pereira Both Both Both Both Significantf
Saffarib Both Both Both Both −0.5% diff P < .001
SMS and Internet:
−0.9% diff P < .001
Taob Both Both Both Both −0.3% diff P < .00001
Mobile:
−0.4% diff. P < .00001
Wu Both Both Both Both −0.5% diff
T2D: −0. 7% diff
Tomab Both Both General Both −0.5% diff P < .00001
Kitsiou Both Tracking General Both T2D: 0.8% decreased
T1D: −0.3% decreased
Orb Both Tracking General Both −0.3% decreased P < .001
Zhaib Both Tracking General Both −0.4% diff
Hamine Both Tracking None Live 11/26 studiesg
Peterson Both Tracking None None 7/15 studiesg
−0.6% to −0.8% rangee

Abbreviations: Diff, difference-between intervention and control; SMS, text messaging; T1D, type 1 diabetes; T2D, type 2 diabetes.

a

Authors ordered from most features to least features.

b

Items signify a meta-analysis.

c

A1c was not reported consistently in reviews; P values are included if they were reported.

d

Decrease means there was a decrease in A1c reported.

e

Range refers to the range of A1c difference reported.

f

Significant means authors did not specify an A1c level.

g

Studies indicates the number of studies reporting significant A1C.