MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200597057 · doi:10.2196/32251

Effects on Adherence to a Mobile App–Based Self-management Digital Therapeutics Among Patients With Coronary Heart Disease: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

2021· article· en· W4200597057 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yuxi Li, Yanjun Gong, Bo Zheng, Fangfang Fan, Tieci Yi, Yimei Zheng, Pengkang He, Jin Fang, Jia Jia, Qin Zhu, Jie Jiang, Yong Huo

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialmHealthMedicineCoronary heart diseaseDigital healthSelf-managementMobile appsPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychological interventionComputer scienceWorld Wide WebHealth careNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The adherence to secondary prevention treatment in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) is low. Digital therapeutics (DTx) refers to an emerging branch of medicine that delivers medical interventions directly to patients using evidence-based, clinically evaluated, technology-based software algorithms or apps to facilitate disease management, which may be an efficient tool to optimize adherence. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to investigate the effect of mobile app-based self-management DTx on long-term use of secondary prevention medications in patients with CHD in China. METHODS: This pilot study was a parallel-designed, open-labeled, single-center, randomized controlled trial. Hospitalized patients with CHD admitted to Peking University First Hospital between April 2016 and June 2017 were randomized before discharge on a 1:1 ratio. The intervention group received regular follow-up combined with DTx, which is a self-management mobile app already installed on an Android 5 (Mi Pad 1, Xiaomi Corporation) tablet. Structured data from the hospital informatics system were integrated automatically, and medication, lifestyle intervention plan, follow-up protocol, and patient education materials were also provided according to the diagnosis. Participants could use DTx for self-management at home. The control group was under conventional hospital-based follow-up care. Patients were followed up for 1 year, and the primary end point was the percentage of all guideline-recommended medications at 12 months. The secondary end points included the percentage adhered to standard secondary prevention medications at 6 months, the control rate of lipid profile, and blood pressure at 6 months and 1 year. RESULTS: Among 300 randomized patients with CHD, 290 (96.7%) were included in the final analysis, including 49.3% (143/290) and 50.7% (147/290) of patients from the intervention and control groups, respectively. Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. There was a statistically significant improvement in the percentage of all guideline-recommended medications at 12 months in the intervention group compared with the control group (relative risk [RR] 1.34, 95% CI 1.12-1.61; P=.001), and there was no interaction with baseline characteristics. The intervention group had a significantly higher proportion of patients achieving blood pressure under control (systolic blood pressure <140 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <1.8 mmol/L (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.22-1.72; P<.001 and RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.11-1.75; P=.004, respectively) at 12 months. Furthermore, on logistic regression, the intervention group had a lower risk of withdrawing from guideline-recommended medications (odds ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.27-0.78; P=.004). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with CHD, using a mobile app-based self-management DTx in addition to traditional care resulted in a significant improvement in guideline-recommended medication adherence at 12 months. The results of the trial will be applicable to primary care centers, especially in rural areas with less medical resources. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03565978; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03565978.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.356 · 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

Citations56
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207