Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 28;8(4):e15400. doi: 10.2196/15400

Table 1.

Summary of clinical outcomes and behavioral changes from 18 meta-analyses reported in 6 reviews of diabetes and obesity mobile health interventions.

Outcomes Referencesa Tested interventions/target patient Intervention vs control groups Estimated effect of intervention: meta-analysis results of the mean difference between intervention and control groups Conclusions
HbA1cb Wang et al [21] Self-management of patients with T1DMc Mobile app or text messaging intervention vs standard care

  • −0.25% (95% CI −0.41 to −0.09; I2=12%)

  • Subgroup analysis—age: teenagers −0.05% (95% CI −0.43 to 0.33; I2=0%); adults −0.29% (95% CI −0.47 to −0.11; I2=48%)

  • Subgroup analysis—intervention: text message −0.20% (95% CI −0.73 to 0.32; I2=0%); mobile apps −0.25% (95% CI −0.42 to −0.08; I2=49%)

  • Subgroup analysis—duration: ≥6 months −0.29% (95% CI −0.46 to −0.11; I2=32%); <6 months −0.01% (95% CI −0.44 to 0.41; I2=0%)

 mHealthd favors
HbA1c Wu et al [22] Self-management of patients with diabetes Mobile app intervention vs standard care alone

  • −0.48% (95% CI −0.78 to −0.19; I2=76%)

  • Subgroup analysis: patients with T2DMe −0.67% (95% CI −1.03 to −0.30; I2=47%); patients with T1DM −0.37% (95% CI −0.86 to −0.12; I2=86%)

 mHealth favors
HbA1c Cui et al [23] Self-management of patients with T2DM Smartphone app strategies vs standard diabetes care

  • −0.40% (95% CI −0.69 to −0.11; I2=77%)

  • Subgroup analysis: baseline HbA1c<8% −0.33% (95% CI −0.59 to −0.06; I2=70%)

 mHealth favors
Body weight Park et al [32] Weight loss interventions on patients with OWBf Mobile app/text messaging intervention vs nonmobile device care (standard)

  • −2.35 kg (95% CI −2.84 to −1.87; I2=94%)

  • Subgroup analysis—duration: at 6 months −2.66 kg (95% CI −3.94 to −1.38; I2=95%); at ≥12 months −1.23 kg (95% CI −2.25 to −0.21; I2=0%)

 mHealth favors
Body weight Mateo et al [33] Weight loss and PAg promotion on patients with OWB Mobile app intervention vs the control diet

  • −1.04 kg (95% CI −1.75 to −0.34; I2=41%)

 mHealth favors
Body weight Khokhar et al [34] Weight loss interventions on patients with OWB Mobile electronic device intervention vs the control

  • −1.09 kg (95% CI −2.12 to −0.05; I2=50%)

  • Subgroup analysis—duration: ≤6 months −0.97 kg (95% CI −2.23 to 0.30; I2=47%); >6 months −1.20 kg (95% CI −3.34 to 0.94; I2=62%)

  • Subgroup analysis—intervention: mobile phone −1.78 kg (95% CI −2.92 to −0.63; I2=16%); personal digital assistant −0.23 kg (95% CI −0.87 to 0.41; I2=0.0%)

 mHealth favors
BMI Park et al [32] Weight loss interventions on patients with OWB Mobile app/text messaging intervention vs nonmobile device care (standard)

  • –0.77 kg/m2 (95% CI −1.01 to −0.52; I2=0%)

  • Subgroup analysis—duration: at 3 months −1.10 kg/m2 (95% CI −2.79 to 0.59; I2=95%); at 6 months −0.67 kg/m2 (95% CI −0.71 to −0.63; I2=0%)

 mHealth favors
BMI Mateo et al [33] Weight loss and PA promotion on patients with OWB Mobile app intervention vs the control diet

  • −0.43 kg/m2 (95% CI −0.74 to −0.13; I2=50%)

 mHealth favors
Physical activity Mateo et al [33] Weight loss and PA promotion on patients with OWB Mobile app intervention vs control intervention

  • Standardized mean difference in net change 0.40 (95% CI −0.07 to 0.87; I2=93%)

 No significant difference

aWe selected 6 meta-analyses on randomized controlled trial studies. Please see our pooled meta-analysis presented in Figure 2.

bHbA1c: hemoglobin A1c (glycated hemoglobin).

cT1DM: type 1 diabetes mellitus.

dmHealth: mobile health.

eT2DM: type 2 diabetes mellitus.

fOWB: overweight and obesity.

gPA: physical activity.