iOS Appstore-Based Phone Apps for Diabetes Management: Potential for Use in Medication Adherence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Currently, various phone apps have been developed to assist patients. Many of these apps are developed to assist patients in the self-management of chronic diseases such as diabetes. It is essential to analyze these various apps to understand the key features that would potentially be instrumental in helping patients successfully achieve goals in disease self-management. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to conduct a review of all the available diabetes-related apps in the iOS App Store to evaluate which diabetic app is more interactive and offers a wide variety of operations such as monitoring glucose, water, carbohydrate intake, weight, body mass index (BMI), medication, blood pressure (BP) levels, reminders or push notifications, food database, charts, exercise management, email, sync between devices, syncing data directly to the prescribers, and other miscellaneous functions such as (Twitter integration, password protection, retina display, barcode scanner, apple watch functionality, and cloud syncing). METHODS: Data was gathered using the iOS App Store on an iPad. The search term "diabetes" resulted in 1209 results. Many of the results obtained were remotely related to diabetes and focused mainly on diet, exercise, emergency services, refill reminders, providing general diabetes information, and other nontherapeutic options. We reviewed each app description and only included apps that were meant for tracking blood glucose levels. All data were obtained in one sitting by one person on the same device, as we found that carrying out the search at different times or on different devices (iPhones) resulted in varying results. Apps that did not have a feature for tracking glucose levels were excluded from the study. RESULTS: The search resulted in 1209 results; 85 apps were retained based on the inclusion criteria mentioned above. All the apps were reviewed for average customer ratings, number of reviews, price, and functions. Of all the apps surveyed, 18 apps with the highest number of user ratings were used for in-depth analysis. Of these 18 apps, 50% (9/18) also had a medication adherence function. Our analysis revealed that the Diabetes logbook used by the mySugr app was one of the best; it differentiated itself by introducing fun as a method of increasing adherence. CONCLUSIONS: A large variation was seen in patient ratings of app features. Many patient reviewers desired simplicity of app functions. Glucose level tracking and email features potentially helped patients and health care providers manage the disease more efficiently. However, none of the apps could sync data directly to the prescribers. Additional features such as graph customization, availability of data backup, and recording previous entries were also requested by many users. Thus, the use of apps in disease management and patient and health-care provider involvement in future app refinement and development should be encouraged.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".