To evaluate progress in the implementation of the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office (EMRO) Regional Framework for Action on Diabetes Prevention and Control, identify implementation barriers and facilitators, and provide recommendations for accelerating progress, with a particular focus on fragile, conflict-affected and vulnerable settings (FCVs).

Mixed-methods study combining secondary analysis of quantitative data from WHO datasets with qualitative synthesis of inputs from WHO consultative meetings with EMR member states.

22 countries of the WHO EMR, including 10 classified as FCV and 12 as non-FCV according to World Bank and WHO classifications.

Quantitative data were drawn from the 2021 WHO Country Capacity Survey targeting all EMR countries and other WHO sources. Qualitative data were based on insights from 16 country representatives during a regional WHO EMRO webinar, including non-communicable diseases programme managers, policy leads and WHO country office staff.

Among the 22 countries analysed, only 10% (1/10) of FCVs had a national diabetes action plan compared with 67% (8/12) of non-FCVs. A sugar-sweetened beverage tax was implemented in 75% (9/12) of non-FCVs but in just 10% (1/10) of FCVs. For diabetes management, detailed national guidelines were available in 30% (3/10) of FCVs compared with 83% (10/12) of non-FCVs; insulin was available in primary care in 50% (5/10) of FCVs compared with 83% (10/12) of non-FCVs. Surveillance systems were less robust in FCVs: while 70% (7/10) collected data on diabetes status, only 30% (3/10) had a national diabetes registry, compared with 83% (10/12) of non-FCVs.

Addressing diabetes in the EMR requires strategic collaboration and tailored approaches for FCVs, including strengthened governance, preparedness, integrated care, medication access and surveillance. Prioritising primary healthcare and embedding diabetes prevention and control in universal health coverage and emergency response frameworks is critical to reducing inequities and improving health outcomes in fragile contexts.

Diabetes mellitus is a significant global health challenge, requiring innovative strategies to improve management and mitigate complications. Digital health technologies offer promising solutions to enhance diabetes self-care by providing real-time feedback, improving communication and supporting data-driven decision-making. Despite the increasing adoption of digital self-care interventions, there is a lack of comprehensive synthesis of evidence on their impact, accessibility and integration into healthcare systems. This scoping review aims to map existing research on digital self-care solutions for diabetes management, identify knowledge gaps and highlight best practices and key factors influencing adoption.

The review will follow Arksey and O’Malley’s framework and adhere to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. A systematic search will be conducted in Medline, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL and Google Scholar, focusing on studies published from January 2004 to December 2024 in English, French, Arabic, Portuguese, Spanish, Italian, Czech, Slovak and Chinese. Studies reporting on digital self-care solutions for diabetes management will be included, covering experimental and quasi-experimental study designs. Data extraction will cover study and participant characteristics, digital solution features, and barriers and facilitators to adoption. Ethical and equity considerations will also be analysed using established frameworks. Two reviewers will independently screen studies, with discrepancies resolved by a third reviewer.

This scoping review will provide a comprehensive understanding of digital self-care solutions for diabetes management, offering insights to inform future research and enhance self-care practices globally. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conferences and interest holder engagements to inform clinical practice and policy development. As this study involves the review of existing literature, ethical approval is not required.