MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417511534 · doi:10.2196/77372

A Culturally Tailored Diabetes Self-Management Education Program With Mobile Health Integration for Chinese Americans With Type 2 Diabetes: Development and Pilot Evaluation Study

2025· article· en· W4417511534 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yawen Li, Wei‐Chin Hwang, Zhongzheng Niu, Xiaomeng Lei, Tiffany Fong, Yunsheng Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsType 2 diabetesHealth careType 2 Diabetes MellitusQualitative researchCultural competenceProgram evaluationIdentification (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although progress has been made in improving the efficacy of Diabetes Self-Management Education (DSME) programs, there remains a dearth of research on culturally adapted, evidence-based DSMEs for Chinese Americans (CAs) with type 2 diabetes. OBJECTIVE: Through collaborative partnerships with 2 large community recreation centers and the AHMC Hospital Network in San Gabriel Valley, California, we developed and pilot-tested a culturally tailored DSME program with integrated mobile health (mHealth) technology, entitled Culturally Appropriate Strategies for Chinese Americans with Diabetes (CASCADe). METHODS: The CASCADe program utilized a combined, theoretically driven, and community-participatory approach and was developed based on information gleaned from focus groups, semistructured interviews, and a questionnaire survey conducted among CA patients with diabetes, physicians, and nurses, as well as from extensive literature reviews of evidence-based program curricula. A single-group pre- and posttest design with a 3-month study period was then employed to assess the program's preliminary efficacy. The study protocols were registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. RESULTS: The CASCADe program consisted of (1) a home visit in the first month for training in monitoring device use and WeChat app (a mobile instant-messaging platform widely used in the Chinese population) usage, as well as for acquiring family support; (2) 8 weekly sessions over the following 2 months, delivered in a combined format of group classes, games, group exercises, videos, and discussions; and (3) WeChat follow-up involving education tips, monitoring data summaries, and group discussions after each of the 8 weekly sessions. Topics covered in the weekly sessions included recognition of diabetes and its complications, risk factors, nutrition knowledge, dietary practices, exercise, behavioral self-monitoring, medication adherence, and stress management. The monitoring system used a smartphone to coordinate cloud-based data transmission from a set of wireless devices to capture daily monitoring data on physical activity, body weight, blood pressure, and blood glucose levels. Behavioral self-monitoring was further facilitated by the WeChat app, which provided daily messages related to the diabetes education curriculum; weekly summary reports of monitoring data; feedback; bidirectional 1-on-1 communication between intervention providers and participants; and group discussions among participants regarding readings and the implications of monitoring results. The pre- and postcomparison from the 3-month pilot trial showed a significant reduction in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c; 7.48 vs 7.09, P=.03), with all but 1 participant demonstrating a reduction and 7 out of 12 (58%) achieving a >0.5 decrease in HbA1c. Significant improvements were also observed in self-efficacy in diabetes management (6.59 vs 8.01, P=.003), quality of life (3.21 vs 3.69, P=.005), and stress-coping skills (3.18 vs 3.74, P=.01) at 3 months after baseline among CA patients with type 2 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Our pilot study demonstrated the feasibility of implementing the CASCADe program among CAs to improve diabetes self-management skills and yielded promising results, warranting further evaluation in a larger randomized trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04737499; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04737499.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.404 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicDiabetes Management and Education→French-language works237,207→