The Effect of an AI-Based, Autonomous, Digital Health Intervention Using Precise Lifestyle Guidance on Blood Pressure in Adults With Hypertension: Single-Arm Nonrandomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Home blood pressure (BP) monitoring with lifestyle coaching is effective in managing hypertension and reducing cardiovascular risk. However, traditional manual lifestyle coaching models significantly limit availability due to high operating costs and personnel requirements. Furthermore, the lack of patient lifestyle monitoring and clinician time constraints can prevent personalized coaching on lifestyle modifications. OBJECTIVE: This study assesses the effectiveness of a fully digital, autonomous, and artificial intelligence (AI)-based lifestyle coaching program on achieving BP control among adults with hypertension. METHODS: Participants were enrolled in a single-arm nonrandomized trial in which they received a BP monitor and wearable activity tracker. Data were collected from these devices and a questionnaire mobile app, which were used to train personalized machine learning models that enabled precision lifestyle coaching delivered to participants via SMS text messaging and a mobile app. The primary outcomes included (1) the changes in systolic and diastolic BP from baseline to 12 and 24 weeks and (2) the percentage change of participants in the controlled, stage-1, and stage-2 hypertension categories from baseline to 12 and 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes included (1) the participant engagement rate as measured by data collection consistency and (2) the number of manual clinician outreaches. RESULTS: In total, 141 participants were monitored over 24 weeks. At 12 weeks, systolic and diastolic BP decreased by 5.6 mm Hg (95% CI -7.1 to -4.2; P<.001) and 3.8 mm Hg (95% CI -4.7 to -2.8; P<.001), respectively. Particularly, for participants starting with stage-2 hypertension, systolic and diastolic BP decreased by 9.6 mm Hg (95% CI -12.2 to -6.9; P<.001) and 5.7 mm Hg (95% CI -7.6 to -3.9; P<.001), respectively. At 24 weeks, systolic and diastolic BP decreased by 8.1 mm Hg (95% CI -10.1 to -6.1; P<.001) and 5.1 mm Hg (95% CI -6.2 to -3.9; P<.001), respectively. For participants starting with stage-2 hypertension, systolic and diastolic BP decreased by 14.2 mm Hg (95% CI -17.7 to -10.7; P<.001) and 8.1 mm Hg (95% CI -10.4 to -5.7; P<.001), respectively, at 24 weeks. The percentage of participants with controlled BP increased by 17.2% (22/128; P<.001) and 26.5% (27/102; P<.001) from baseline to 12 and 24 weeks, respectively. The percentage of participants with stage-2 hypertension decreased by 25% (32/128; P<.001) and 26.5% (27/102; P<.001) from baseline to 12 and 24 weeks, respectively. The average weekly participant engagement rate was 92% (SD 3.9%), and only 5.9% (6/102) of the participants required manual outreach over 24 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrates the potential of fully digital, autonomous, and AI-based lifestyle coaching to achieve meaningful BP improvements and high engagement for patients with hypertension while substantially reducing clinician workloads. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06337734; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06337734.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".