MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414715584 · doi:10.2196/81098

WhatsApp-Based Intervention for Diabetes Prevention and Care in Argentina: Implementation and Process Evaluation

2025· article· en· W4414715584 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Analía Nejamis, Laura Gutiérrez, María Victoria López, Álvaro Ciganda, Omayra Mendoza Quispe, Vilma Irazola, Andrea Beratarrechea

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Digital healthWork (physics)Inclusion (mineral)Service delivery frameworkPopulationProcess (computing)Public health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In Argentina, diabetes is a growing public health concern, with a prevalence of 14% in 2024 and projections reaching 15.4% by 2050. In this context, a Diabetes Prevention and Care Program was implemented in low-income areas across 3 provinces. A key component of the program was a WhatsApp (WhatsApp LLC)-based intervention aimed at promoting self-care, encouraging healthy behaviors, and supporting follow-up among people with diabetes, those at risk, and pregnant women. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the implementation and process evaluation of a WhatsApp-based intervention within Argentina's public health system, using the Carroll Implementation Fidelity Framework, focusing on challenges encountered, implementation strategies used, and lessons learned across the 3 target populations. METHODS: The intervention was implemented in 40 primary care centers. The population included adults residing in the catchment areas of the selected primary care centers. Participants included adults with type 2 diabetes, people at moderate or high risk based on the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score, and pregnant women. A set of 192 educational and reminder messages was developed and validated through expert input and community feedback. Messages were tailored to each target population and delivered through WhatsApp via Twilio (Twilio Inc) Business API (application programming interface). We assessed implementation fidelity focusing on adherence to the intervention, participant responsiveness, quality of delivery, and contextual barriers. RESULTS: A total of 11,029 participants were enrolled in this study, of whom 9983 (90.5%) had a valid mobile phone number registered in the system. Among these, 32.8% (3276/9983) had a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, 53.3% (5320/9983) were identified as being at moderate or high risk based on the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score questionnaire, and 13.9% (1387/9983) were pregnant women. Overall, 67.3% (n=5749) opted in to receive messages, with the highest acceptance among those with diabetes (n=2169, 74.3%) and the lowest among at-risk people (n=2935, 62.1%). Message adherence was high: 88.7% (n=5004) of participants received at least the minimum number of educational messages expected, and the mean proportion of messages read per participant was 82.2% (SD 29.8). The dropout rate was low (6.1%) but higher among pregnant participants (14.6%). Message delivery issues mostly included problems with WhatsApp on the mobile phones of participants. Technical challenges, including server overload, were addressed during implementation. CONCLUSIONS: The WhatsApp-based intervention was feasible and well-received in public primary care settings in Argentina, particularly among people with diabetes. The experience illustrates how a WhatsApp-based intervention can be leveraged to strengthen service delivery in low-resource contexts, while also highlighting the need for further work on integration with electronic health records, tailoring of content to population needs, and strategies to enhance digital inclusion for underserved populations.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.616
Teacher spread0.495 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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