Initial Implementation of the My Heart, My Life Program by the National Heart Foundation of Australia: Pilot Mixed Methods Evaluation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Coronary heart disease (CHD) remains the leading cause of death in Australia, with a high residual risk of repeat events in survivors. Secondary prevention therapy is crucial for reducing the risk of both death and other major adverse cardiac events. The National Heart Foundation of Australia has developed a consumer-facing support program called My Heart, My Life (MHML) to address the gap in the secondary prevention of CHD in Australia. The MHML pilot program supplies advice and support for both patients and their caregivers, and it was conducted over 8 months from November 2019 to June 2020. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe and examine the implementation of a novel multimodality secondary CHD prevention pilot program called MHML, which was delivered through booklets, text messages, emails, and telephone calls. METHODS: This pilot study consists of a mixed methods evaluation involving surveys of participants (patients and caregivers) and health professionals, in-depth interviews, and digital communication (SMS text message, electronic direct mail, and call record analytics). This study was performed in people older than 18 years with acute coronary syndrome or angina and their caregivers in 38 Australian hospitals from November 2019 to June 2020 through the National Heart Foundation of Australia web page. The main outcome measures were reach, accessibility, feasibility, barriers, and enablers to implementation of this program. RESULTS: Of the 1004 participants (838 patients and 164 caregivers; 2 missing), 60.9% (608/1001) were males, 50.7% (491/967) were aged between 45 and 64 years, 27.4% (276/1004) were from disadvantaged areas, 2.5% (24/946) were from Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander background, and 16.9% (170/1004) reported English as their second language. The participants (patients and their caregivers) and health professionals reported high satisfaction with the MHML program (55/62, 88.7% and 33/38, 87%, respectively). Of the 62 participants who took the survey, 88% (55/62) used the text messaging service and reported a very high level of satisfaction. Approximately 94% (58/62) and 89% (55/62) of the participants were satisfied with the quick guide booklets 1 and 2, respectively; 79% (49/62) were satisfied with the monthly email journey and 71% (44/62) were satisfied with the helpline calls. Most participants reported that the MHML program improved preventive behaviors, that is, 73% (45/62) of them reported that they maintained increased physical activity and 84% (52/62) reported that they maintained a healthy diet even after the MHML program. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our pilot study suggest that a multimodal support program, including digital, print, phone, and web-based media, for the secondary prevention of CHD is useful and could be a potential means of providing customized at-scale secondary prevention support for survivors of acute coronary syndrome.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".