Guideline-Based Cardiovascular Risk Assessment Delivered by an mHealth App: Development Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Identifying high-risk individuals is crucial for preventing cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). Currently, risk assessment is mostly performed by physicians. Mobile health apps could help decouple the determination of risk from medical resources by allowing unrestricted self-assessment. The respective test results need to be interpretable for laypersons. OBJECTIVE: Together with a patient organization, we aimed to design a digital risk calculator that allows people to individually assess and optimize their CVD risk. The risk calculator was integrated into the mobile health app HerzFit, which provides the respective background information. METHODS: To cover a broad spectrum of individuals for both primary and secondary prevention, we integrated the respective scores (Framingham 10-year CVD, Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2, Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 in Older Persons, and Secondary Manifestations Of Arterial Disease) into a single risk calculator that was recalibrated for the German population. In primary prevention, an individual's heart age is estimated, which gives the user an easy-to-understand metric for assessing cardiac health. For secondary prevention, the risk of recurrence was assessed. In addition, a comparison of expected to mean and optimal risk levels was determined. The risk calculator is available free of charge. Data safety is ensured by processing the data locally on the users' smartphones. RESULTS: Offering a risk calculator to the general population requires the use of multiple instruments, as each provides only a limited spectrum in terms of age and risk distribution. The integration of 4 internationally recommended scores allows risk calculation in individuals aged 30 to 90 years with and without CVD. Such integration requires recalibration and harmonization to provide consistent and plausible estimates. In the first 14 months after the launch, the HerzFit calculator was downloaded more than 96,000 times, indicating great demand. Public information campaigns proved effective in publicizing the risk calculator and contributed significantly to download numbers. CONCLUSIONS: The HerzFit calculator provides CVD risk assessment for the general population. The public demonstrated great demand for such a risk calculator as it was downloaded up to 10,000 times per month, depending on campaigns creating awareness for the instrument.
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 | 0.013 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".