ReviewCureus2024
Evaluating the Impact of Telemedicine on Diabetes Management in Rural Communities: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Village doctor-led integrated care for older adults with diabetes in rural China: a cluster-randomized pilot trial.BMC geriatrics · 2026Trial
- Impact of a remote nutrition education on low-carbohydrate diet based in type 2 diabetes management: findings from a Brazilian primary care randomized controlled trial.Diabetology international · 2026Article
- Automated Text Message Outreach to Increase Diabetes Screening: A Pragmatic Randomized Trial.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Telemedicine is the delivery of healthcare services using information and communication technologies to diagnose, treat, and prevent diseases. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the adoption of telemedicine, transforming how healthcare is delivered, especially in remote and underserved areas. Despite its potential, no systematic reviews have been conducted in the last five years to assess the effectiveness of telemedicine for managing diabetes in rural populations. This review addresses this gap by evaluating studies on telemedicine's impact on glycemic control among diabetic patients in these settings. We searched five databases: PubMed, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov, ScienceDirect, and Science.gov, covering studies published in the last five years. Of the 331 articles identified, 10 met our inclusion criteria: English-language studies from the past five years involving adults in rural areas or comparing rural and urban settings, focusing on telemedicine's impact on glycemic control in diabetic patients. In many studies, the findings revealed that telemedicine interventions integrated into structured programs significantly improved HbA1c levels. Successful implementation requires local infrastructure and consistent patient-provider interactions, although increased healthcare provider workloads may affect sustainability. Telemedicine alone was less effective for patients with complex comorbidities, suggesting that a combined approach with in-person visits may be more effective. This review highlights telemedicine's potential to replace routine in-person visits for diabetes management in rural areas, demonstrating significant improvements in HbA1c levels, medication adherence, and timely care management support. Future research should focus on randomized controlled trials in rural settings, hybrid care models that optimize in-person visit frequency and remote monitoring, and addressing technological challenges such as broadband access and platform usability to ensure sustainable telehealth interventions.
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.