MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4323529973 · doi:10.2196/43292

Fitterfly Diabetes CGM Digital Therapeutics Program for Glycemic Control and Weight Management in People With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Real-world Effectiveness Evaluation

2023· article· en· W4323529973 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shilpa Joshi, Ritika Verma, Tejal Lathia, Chitra Selvan, Snehal Tanna, Amit Saraf, Mangesh Tiwaskar, Alok Modi, Sanjay Kalra, K Vasudevarao, Manoj Chitale, Forum Malde, Mohammed Khader, Arbinder Singal

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Diabetes · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlycemicMedicineDiabetes mellitusDiabetes managementDigital healthType 2 diabetesType 2 Diabetes MellitusPhysical therapyHealth careEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Digital therapeutic platforms facilitate health care through patient-centered strategies based on multidisciplinary teams and shared decision-making. Such platforms can be used for developing a dynamic model of diabetes care delivery, which can help in improving glycemic control by promoting long-term behavior changes in people with diabetes. Objective This study aims to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of the Fitterfly Diabetes CGM digital therapeutics program for improving glycemic control in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) after the completion of 90 days in the program. Methods We analyzed deidentified data of 109 participants in the Fitterfly Diabetes CGM program. This program was delivered through the Fitterfly mobile app coupled with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology. This program consists of 3 phases: the first phase is observation, wherein the patient’s CGM readings are observed for 7 days (week 1); the second phase is the intervention; and the third phase aims at sustaining the lifestyle modification introduced during the second phase. The primary outcome of our study was the change in the participants’ hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels after program completion. We also evaluated the changes in participant weight and BMI after the program, changes in the CGM metrics in the initial 2 weeks of the program, and the effects of participant engagement in the program on improving their clinical outcomes. Results At the end of the 90 days of the program, the mean HbA1c levels, weight, and BMI of the participants were significantly reduced by 1.2% (SD 1.6%), 2.05 (SD 2.84) kg, and 0.74 (SD 1.02) kg/m2 from baseline values of 8.4% (SD 1.7%), 74.45 (SD 14.96) kg, and 27.44 (SD 4.69) kg/m2 in week 1, respectively (P<.001). The average blood glucose levels and time above range values showed a significant mean reduction by 16.44 (SD 32.05) mg/dL and 8.7% (SD 17.1%) in week 2 from week 1 baseline values of 152.90 (SD 51.63) mg/dL and 36.7% (SD 28.4%), respectively (P<.001 for both). Time in range values significantly improved by 7.1% (SD 16.7%) from a baseline value of 57.5% (SD 25%) in week 1 (P<.001). Of all the participants, 46.9% (50/109) showed HbA1c reduction ≥1% and 38.5% (42/109) showed weight loss ≥4%. The average number of times the mobile app was opened by each participant during the program was 108.80 (SD 127.91) times. Conclusions Our study shows that participants in the Fitterfly Diabetes CGM program showed a significant improvement in their glycemic control and reduction in weight and BMI. They also showed a high level of engagement with the program. Weight reduction was significantly associated with higher participant engagement with the program. Thus, this digital therapeutic program can be considered as an effective tool for improving glycemic control in people with T2DM.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.373 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Diabetes→Same topicMobile Health and mHealth Applications→French-language works237,207→