The Impact of Text Messaging on Medication Adherence and Exercise Among Postmyocardial Infarction Patients: Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adherence to evidence-based therapies such as medications and exercise remains poor among patients after a myocardial infarction (MI). Text message reminders have been shown to improve rates of adherence to medication and exercise, but the existing studies have been of short duration. OBJECTIVE: Two single-center randomized controlled pilot trials were conducted to evaluate the impact of text message reminders over 12 months on adherence to cardiac medications and exercise among patients receiving cardiac rehabilitation after hospitalization for MI. METHODS: In the medication adherence trial, 34 patients were randomized to receive usual care alone or usual care plus daily text message reminders delivered at the time of day at which medications were to be taken. In the exercise adherence trial, 50 patients were randomized to receive usual care alone or usual care plus 4 daily text messages reminding them to exercise as directed. RESULTS: The text message reminders led to a mean 14.2 percentage point improvement in self-reported medication adherence over usual care (P<.001, 95% CI 7-21). In the exercise trial, text message reminders resulted in an additional 4.2 days (P=.001, 95% CI 1.9-6.4) and 4.0 hours (P<.001, 95% CI 2.4-5.6) of exercise per month over usual care and a nonsignificant increase of 1.2 metabolic equivalents (METS; P=.06) in exercise capacity as assessed by a BRUCE protocol at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Text message reminders significantly increased adherence to medication and exercise among post-MI patients receiving care in a structured cardiac rehabilitation program. This technology represents a simple and scalable method to ensure consistent use of evidence-based cardiovascular therapies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02783287; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02783287 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6sBnvNb05).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".