Mobile Phone–Based Remote Patient Monitoring System for Management of Hypertension in Diabetic Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rising concern over the poor level of blood-pressure (BP) control among hypertensive patients has prompted searches for novel ways of managing hypertension. The objectives of this study were to develop and pilot-test a home BP tele-management system that actively engages patients in the process of care. METHODS: Phase 1 involved a series of focus-group meetings with patients and primary care providers to guide the system's development. In Phase 2, 33 diabetic patients with uncontrolled ambulatory hypertension were enrolled in a 4-month pilot study, using a before-and-after design to assess its effectiveness in lowering BP, its acceptability to users, and the reliability of home BP measurements. RESULTS: The system, developed using commodity hardware, comprised a Bluetooth-enabled home BP monitor, a mobile phone to receive and transmit data, a central server for data processing, a fax-back system to send physicians' reports, and a BP alerting system. In the pilot study, 24-h ambulatory BP fell by 11/5 (+/-13/7 SD) mm Hg (both P < .001), and BP control improved significantly. Substantially more home readings were received by the server than expected, based on the preset monitoring schedule. Of 42 BP alerts sent to patients, almost half (n = 20) were due to low BP. Physicians received no critical BP alerts. Patients perceived the system as acceptable and effective. CONCLUSIONS: The encouraging results of this study provide a strong rationale for a long-term, randomized, clinical trial to determine whether this home BP tele-management system improves BP control in the community among patients with uncontrolled hypertension.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".