Trial reportNutrients2024
Telenutrition Education Is Effective for Glycemic Management in People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Non-Inferiority Randomized Controlled Trial in Japan.
Trial report in Nutrients, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health Coaching and Its Impact in the Remote Management of Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Scoping Review of the Literature.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study examined the non-inferior efficacy of telenutrition education compared with face-to-face nutrition education in managing glycemic control in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Participants had T2DM and a glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) ranged 6.5-9.5%. Thirty participants were randomly assigned to either the telenutrition or face-to-face nutrition education group. During the 32-week intervention period, the participants received four sessions on nutrition education from a registered dietitian at the hospital. The telenutrition group received remote education via a videoconferencing platform. Face-to-face nutrition education was conducted using paper-based instructions. The main outcome measure was the non-inferiority of HbA1c levels in the telenutrition group compared to the face-to-face nutrition group. The non-inferiority of telenutrition education was considered valid if the intergroup difference in the mean values of the change in HbA1c had a bilateral 95% confidence interval (CI) upper limit below 0.40%. The intergroup difference in the mean HbA1c change from baseline to the fourth nutrition education session was -0.11 (95% CI -0.54-0.32) for both groups. The upper limit of the bilateral 95% CI was 0.32%, which was below the 0.40% non-inferiority margin (non-inferiority test;
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.