ArticleJMIR diabetes2024
Technology and Continuous Glucose Monitoring Access, Literacy, and Use Among Patients at the Diabetes Center of an Inner-City Safety-Net Hospital: Mixed Methods Study.
Article in JMIR diabetes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementing ADA 2026 diabetes technology recommendations: opportunities and challenges for quality improvement in real-world care.BMJ open quality · 2026Article
- Personalized Digital Health Solutions to Increasing Diabetes-Related Knowledge and Behavioral Outcomes: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR diabetes · 2026Article
- Acceptability and usability of continuous glucose monitoring systems in older adults aged 75 years and older with diabetes.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Experience of Using Wearable Devices for Dietary Management for Chinese Americans With Type 2 Diabetes: One-Group Prospective Cohort Study.JMIR diabetes · 2025Article
- Consensus statement on standardizing CGM evaluation metrics in Latin America: an expert approach.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2025Article
- A Qualitative Analysis of Provider-Level Barriers to Prescribing Diabetes Technology.Journal of diabetes research · 2025Article
- Evaluation of a Continuous Glucose Monitoring Based Regimen in a Resource-Limited Setting: A Pilot Study.Clinical medicine insights. Endocrinology and diabetes · 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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite the existence of an increasing array of digital technologies and tools for diabetes management, there are disparities in access to and uptake and use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices, particularly for those most at risk of poor diabetes outcomes.
objectiveThis study aims to assess communication technology and CGM access, literacy, and use among patients receiving treatment for diabetes at an inner-city safety-net hospital.
methodsA survey on digital technology ownership and use was self-administered by 75 adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes at the diabetes clinic of Grady Memorial Hospital in Atlanta, Georgia. In-depth interviews were conducted with 16% (12/75) of these patient participants and 6 health care providers (HCPs) to obtain additional insights into the use of communication technology and CGM to support diabetes self-management.
resultsMost participants were African American (66/75, 88%), over half (39/75, 52%) were unemployed or working part time, and 29% (22/75) had no health insurance coverage, while 61% (46/75) had federal coverage. Smartphone ownership and use were near universal; texting and email use were common (63/75, 84% in both cases). Ownership and use of tablets and computers and use and daily use of various forms of media were more prevalent among younger participants and those with type 1 diabetes, who also rated them as easier to use. Technology use specifically for diabetes and health management was low. Participants were supportive of a potential smartphone app for diabetes management, with a high interest in such an app helping them track blood sugar levels and communicate with their care teams. Younger participants showed higher levels of interest, perceived value, and self-efficacy for using an app with these capabilities. History of CGM use was reported by 56% (42/75) of the participants, although half (20/42, 48%) had discontinued use, above all due to the cost of the device and issues with its adhesive. Nonuse was primarily due to not being offered CGM by their HCP. Reasons given for continued use included convenience, improved blood glucose control, and better tracking of blood glucose. The in-depth interviews (n=18) revealed high levels of satisfaction with CGM by users and supported the survey findings regarding reasons for continued use. They also highlighted the value of CGM data to enhance communication between patients and HCPs.
conclusionsSmartphone ownership was near universal among patients receiving care at an inner-city hospital. Alongside the need to address barriers to CGM access and continued use, there is an opportunity to leverage increased access to communication technology in combination with CGM to improve diabetes outcomes among underresourced populations.
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.