MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Randomized Controlled Trial of E-Counseling for Hypertension

2018· article· en· W2884561313 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert P. Nolan, Ross D. Feldman, Martin Dawes, Janusz Kaczorowski, Hazel Lynn, Susan I. Barr, Carolyn MacPhail, Scott Thomas, Jack M. Goodman, Günther Eysenbach, Sam Liu, Rika Tanaka, Jelena Surikova

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaSt. Thomas UniversityHealth PEISouth Bruce Grey Health CentreUniversité de MontréalUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Boniface HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyFamily medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The efficacy of internet-based interventions to improve hypertension management is not established. We evaluated the therapeutic benefit of e-counseling by adapting best evidence guidelines for behavioral counseling. Methods and Results: This multicenter double-blind randomized controlled trial included assessments at baseline, 4 months, and 12 months. Participants were 35 to 74 years of age and diagnosed with hypertension: systolic/diastolic blood pressure (BP) 130 to 180/85 to 110 mm Hg. BP was assessed by automated office measurement. E-Counseling used multimedia and interactive tools to increase motivation and skill for self-care (exercise, diet, medication adherence, and smoking cessation). Control used self-care education. Frequency of contact by our e-platform was equal for both trial arms. Primary end points were change at 4 and 12 months in systolic BP, diastolic BP, pulse pressure, total lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total lipoprotein cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio, non–high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and Framingham 10-year cardiovascular risk index. Intention-to-treat analysis used generalized linear models adjusted for baseline measures, sex, and medications. Among 264 participants, mean age was 57.6 years (SE, 0.6), 58% were women, with 83% on antihypertensive medications. At 12 months, e-counseling versus control evoked greater reduction in systolic BP (−10.1 mm Hg [95% confidence interval (CI), −12.5, −7.6] versus −6.0 mm Hg [95% CI, −8.5, −3.5]; P =0.02); pulse pressure (−5.2 mm Hg [95% CI, −6.9, −3.5] versus −2.7 mm Hg [95% CI, −4.5, −0.9]; P =0.04), and Framingham risk index (−1.9% [95% CI, −3.3, −0.5] versus −0.02% [95% CI, −1.2, 1.7]; P =0.02), respectively. Among males in e-counseling versus control, 12-month end points included lower diastolic BP ( P =0.01), non–high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ( P =0.04), total lipoprotein cholesterol ( P =0.03), and a trend for total lipoprotein cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio ( P =0.07). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first double-blind randomized trial of e-counseling for hypertension. Added benefit for medical therapy was achieved by combining available technology with a clinically organized protocol of motivational and cognitive-behavioral counseling. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01541540

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations66
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and OutcomesSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207