MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213214829 · doi:10.2196/33286

Developing and Implementing an mHealth Heart Failure Self-care Program to Reduce Readmissions: Randomized Controlled Trial

2022· article· en· W4213214829 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cardio · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality
KeywordsmHealthMedicineRandomized controlled trialQuality of life (healthcare)AttritionTelemedicineSelf-managementClinical trialHealth carePhysical therapyEmergency medicinePsychological interventionNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients admitted with decompensated heart failure (HF) are at risk for hospital readmission and poor quality of life during the discharge period. Lifestyle behavior modifications that promote the self-management of chronic cardiac diseases have been associated with an improved quality of life. However, whether a mobile health (mHealth) program can assist patients in the self-management of HF during the acute posthospital discharge period is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop an mHealth program designed to enhance patients' self-management of HF by increasing knowledge, self-efficacy, and symptom detection. We hypothesized that patients hospitalized with HF would be willing to use a feasibly deployed mHealth program after their hospital discharge. METHODS: We employed a patient-centered outcomes research methodology to design a stakeholder-informed mHealth program. Adult patients with HF admitted to a large academic hospital were enrolled and randomized to receive the mHealth intervention versus usual care. Our feasibility outcomes included ease of program deployment, use of the clinical escalation process, duration of participant recruitment, and participant attrition. Surveys assessing the demographics and clinical characteristics of HF were measured at baseline and at 30 and 90 days after discharge. RESULTS: The study period was between July 1, 2019, and April 7, 2020. The mean cohort (N=31) age was 60.4 (range 22-85) years. Over half of the participants were men (n=18, 58%) and 77% (n=24) were White. There were no significant differences in baseline measures. We determined that an educational mHealth program tailored for patients with HF is feasibly deployed and acceptable by patients. Though not significant, we found notable trends including a higher mean quality of life at 30 days posthospitalization among program users and a longer duration before rehospitalization, which are suggestive of better HF prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: Our mHealth tool should be further assessed in a larger comparative effectiveness trial. Our pilot intervention offers promise as an innovative means to help HF patients lead healthy, independent lives. These preliminary data suggest that patient-centered mHealth tools can enable high-risk patients to play a role in the management of their HF after discharge. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03982017; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03982017.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.380
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.340 · 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