MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411116852 · doi:10.1016/j.cjcpc.2025.06.001

A Cluster Randomized Trial of an mHealth Intervention for Adolescents With Congenital Heart Disease: Rationale and Design of the READYorNot CHD Study

2025· article· en· W4411116852 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew S. Mackie, Adrienne H. Kovacs, Daniella San Martin-Feeney, Alicia Via-Dufresne Ley, Brian W. McCrindle, Kevin C. Harris, Anne Fournier, Alyssa Chappell, Jody Gingrich, Gina Dimitropoulos, Brooke Allemang, Navreet Gill, Sandra Aiello, Martha Rolland, Sunita O’Shea, Lea Legge, Jennifer A. Collins, Susan Casey, Fabiola Breault, Frederique Provencher, Rebecca Balmir, Rocio Gutierrez Rojas, Maryna Yaskina, Scott Klarenbach, Jennifer Zwicker, James M. Brophy, Roberta L. Woodgate, Ariane Marelli

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteMcGill UniversityUniversity of CalgaryCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineBC Children's HospitalStollery Children's HospitalHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of ManitobaMontreal Heart InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersInstitut canadien d'information sur la santéCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchChildren's Hospital FoundationStollery Children’s Hospital FoundationAlberta InnovatesWomen and Children's Health Research InstituteChildren's Health Research Institute
KeywordsmHealthCluster (spacecraft)Intervention (counseling)Randomized controlled trialHeart diseaseMedicineCluster randomised controlled trialPhysical therapyPediatricsInternal medicineNursingPsychological interventionComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The population of adolescents with congenital heart disease (CHD) is growing exponentially and requires transition preparation for adult-oriented health care. Nurse-led transition programs are effective in improving CHD knowledge and self-management skills. However, many clinical programs lack the human resources needed to provide transition services. Mobile health applications have the potential to prepare transition-age youth for entering adult health care. However, there are no outcome data on the impact and effectiveness of CHD transition applications. Accordingly, in partnership with a Youth Advisory Council, we developed the MyREADY Transition CHD App (the App) designed to enhance youth CHD knowledge and self-management skills. The READYorNot CHD study is a multicenter, cluster randomized noninferiority clinical trial that is evaluating the efficacy of the App plus limited nurse teaching (intervention), vs comprehensive nurse-only teaching (control) for 16- to 17-year-olds with moderate or complex CHD. Participants are being enrolled in clusters based on week of attendance in the pediatric cardiology clinic, with a 1:1 allocation between intervention vs control and target recruitment of 204 participants. The primary outcome is the change in Transition Readiness Assessment Questionnaire score from baseline to 18 months. Secondary outcomes are change in CHD knowledge score, self-efficacy, and time to first adult CHD appointment. Semistructured interviews will provide additional insights into the advantages and disadvantages of the App vs nurse-only teaching. This study will inform patients, pediatric cardiology programs, and policy makers in judging whether this mobile health intervention warrants widespread availability in clinical settings to improve transition outcomes of adolescents with CHD. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04463446.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCJC Pediatric and Congenital Heart DiseaseSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207