The Effects of the ManageHF4Life Mobile App on Patients With Chronic Heart Failure: Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The successful management of heart failure (HF) involves guideline-based medical therapy as well as self-management behavior. As a result, the management of HF is moving toward a proactive real-time technological model of assisting patients with monitoring and self-management. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper was to evaluate the efficacy of enhanced self-management via a mobile app intervention on health-related quality of life, self-management, and HF readmissions. METHODS: A single-center randomized controlled trial was performed. Participants older than 45 years and admitted for acute decompensated HF or recently discharged in the past 4 weeks were included. The intervention group ("app group") used a mobile app, and the intervention prompted daily self-monitoring and promoted self-management. The control group ("no-app group") received usual care. The primary outcome was the change in Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) score from baseline to 6 and 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes were the Self-Care Heart Failure Index (SCHFI) questionnaire score and recurrent HF admissions. RESULTS: A total of 83 participants were enrolled and completed all baseline assessments. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups except for the prevalence of ischemic HF. The app group had a reduced MLHFQ at 6 weeks (mean 37.5, SD 3.5 vs mean 48.2, SD 3.7; P=.04) but not at 12 weeks (mean 44.2, SD 4 vs mean 45.9, SD 4; P=.78), compared to the no-app group. There was no effect of the app on the SCHFI at 6 or 12 weeks. The time to first HF readmission was not statistically different between the app group and the no-app group (app group 11/42, 26% vs no-app group 12/41, 29%; hazard ratio 0.89, 95% CI 0.39-2.02; P=.78) over 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: The adaptive mobile app intervention, which focused on promoting self-monitoring and self-management, improved the MLHFQ at 6 weeks but did not sustain its effects at 12 weeks. No effect was seen on HF self-management measured by self-report. Further research is needed to enhance engagement in the app for a longer period and to determine if the app can reduce HF readmissions in a larger study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03149510; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03149510.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".