MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389061712 · doi:10.2196/52697

Efficacy of eHealth Technologies on Medication Adherence in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2023· article· en· W4389061712 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Akshaya Srikanth Bhagavathula, Wafa Ali Aldhaleei, Tesfay Mehari Atey, Solomon Assefa, Wubshet Tesfaye

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cardio · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedication Adherence and Compliance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisAcute coronary syndromeeHealthMedicineInternal medicineMedication adherenceSystematic reviewIntensive care medicineMEDLINEHealth careMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Suboptimal adherence to cardiac pharmacotherapy, recommended by the guidelines after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has been recognized and is associated with adverse outcomes. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that eHealth technologies are useful in reducing cardiovascular risk factors. However, little is known about the effect of eHealth interventions on medication adherence in patients following ACS. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to examine the efficacy of the eHealth interventions on medication adherence to selected 5 cardioprotective medication classes in patients with ACS. METHODS: A systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted between May and October 2022, with an update in October 2023 to identify RCTs that evaluated the effectiveness of eHealth technologies, including texting, smartphone apps, or web-based apps, to improve medication adherence in patients after ACS. The risk of bias was evaluated using the modified Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs. A pooled meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effect Mantel-Haenszel model and assessed the medication adherence to the medications of statins, aspirin, P2Y12 inhibitors, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, and β-blockers. RESULTS: We identified 5 RCTs, applicable to 4100 participants (2093 intervention vs 2007 control), for inclusion in the meta-analysis. In patients who recently had an ACS, compared to the control group, the use of eHealth intervention was not associated with improved adherence to statins at different time points (risk difference [RD] -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03 at 6 months and RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.02 at 12 months), P2Y12 inhibitors (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.02 and RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.02), aspirin (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.07 and RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.06), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.02 and RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.05), and β-blockers (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03 and RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.03). The intervention was also not associated with improved adherence irrespective of the adherence assessment method used (self-report or objective). CONCLUSIONS: This review identified limited evidence on the effectiveness of eHealth interventions on adherence to guideline-recommended medications after ACS. While the pooled analyses suggested a lack of effectiveness of such interventions on adherence improvement, further studies are warranted to better understand the role of different eHealth approaches in the post-ACS context.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.541
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR CardioSame topicMedication Adherence and ComplianceFrench-language works237,207