Skip to main content

Telemedicine for cardiometabolic disease control in Latin America and the Caribbean: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal
Preventive medicine reports (Q1)
Published
23 September 2026
Study design
Systematic review / meta-analysis of RCTs
Evidence level
Level 1, High (CEBM 1a)
Authors
Kevin Saldarriaga-Bedoya, Sergio César Ruiz-Jiménez, Santiago José Sánchez-Rodríguez, Gladys Rocío Ariza-Sosa, Sjoukje van der Werf, Erik Buskens, et al.
PMID
42831131
DOI
10.1016/j.pmedr.2026.103633

Why clinicians should know about it

  • Picked for Health Informatics (paper of the day, 6 October 2026): Systematic review of telemedicine for cardiometabolic disease control

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of telemedicine for cardiometabolic disease control in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). METHODS: We systematically searched international and regional databases from inception to 17 December 2025 for telemedicine interventions in adults with type 2 diabetes, hypertension, or dyslipidaemia in LAC. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using validated tools and GRADE, respectively. Random-effects meta-analyses included clinically comparable randomised trials. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies from 10 countries were included (11 randomised). Meta-analyses included seven trials (935 participants) for HbA1c, four (451) for systolic blood pressure, and three (280) for diastolic blood pressure. Pooled estimates favoured telemedicine for HbA1c (MD -0.62%, 95% CI -1.02, -0.22; low certainty), systolic blood pressure (MD -6.60 mmHg, 95% CI -9.49, -3.71; high certainty), and diastolic blood pressure (MD -4.25 mmHg, 95% CI -6.53, -1.98; moderate certainty). HbA1c heterogeneity was substantial (I2 = 66%), and its prediction interval crossed the null (-1.77%, 0.56%). CONCLUSIONS: Selected telemedicine interventions may improve intermediate cardiometabolic outcomes in specific LAC settings. However, limited and heterogeneous evidence, variable certainty, and insufficient evidence on long-term effectiveness, scalability, cost-effectiveness, and equity preclude broad implementation recommendations. PROSPERO: CRD420251234521.

Abstract as published, via PubMed.

View on PubMedFull text at the publisherOpen in the app

For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.