Long-Term Results of a Digital Hypertension Self-Management Program: Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Digital health programs that incorporate frequent blood pressure (BP) self-monitoring and support for behavior change offer a scalable solution for hypertension management. Objective We examined the impact of a digital hypertension self-management and lifestyle change support program on BP over 12 months. Methods Data were analyzed from a retrospective observational cohort of commercially insured members (n=1117) that started the Omada for Hypertension program between January 1, 2019, and September 30, 2021. Paired t tests and linear regression were used to measure the changes in systolic blood pressure (SBP) over 12 months overall and by SBP control status at baseline (≥130 mm Hg vs <130 mm Hg). Results Members were on average 50.9 years old, 50.8% (n=567) of them were female, 60.5% (n=675) of them were White, and 70.5% (n=788) of them had uncontrolled SBP at baseline (≥130 mm Hg). At 12 months, all members (including members with controlled and uncontrolled BP at baseline) and those with uncontrolled SBP at baseline experienced significant mean reductions in SBP (mean –4.8 mm Hg, 95% CI –5.6 to –4.0; –8.1 mm Hg, 95% CI –9.0 to –7.1, respectively; both P<.001). Members with uncontrolled SBP at baseline also had significant reductions in diastolic blood pressure (–4.7 mm Hg; 95% CI –5.3 to –4.1), weight (–6.5 lbs, 95% CI –7.7 to –5.3; 2.7% weight loss), and BMI (–1.1 kg/m2; 95% CI –1.3 to –0.9; all P<.001). Those with controlled SBP at baseline maintained within BP goal range. Additionally, 48% (418/860) of members with uncontrolled BP at baseline experienced enough change in BP to improve their BP category. Conclusions This study provides real-world evidence that a comprehensive digital health program involving hypertension education, at-home BP monitoring, and behavior change coaching support was effective for self-managing hypertension over 12 months.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".