MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417331150 · doi:10.2196/76146

Implementing a Smartphone and Wearable-Based Stress Management Intervention in Women with Coronary artery spasms to Reduce Cardiac Symptoms: A Multicenter, Single-Arm, One-way Crossover Study (Preprint)

2025· article· en· W4417331150 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Peter David Faasse, Annemiek de Vos, Joan G. Meeder, Arnoud W.J. van ’t Hof, P J C Winkler, Jos Widdershoven, Valeria Paradies, Eveline Wouters, Gerard Schouten, Angela H.E.M. Maas, Suzette Elias‐Smale

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrossover studyIntervention (counseling)CrossoverStress managementCoronary artery diseaseHeart rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mental stress is a well-known trigger of cardiac symptoms in patients with coronary artery spasms. Hence, stress management is recommended along with medical therapy. However, specific programs for patients with coronary spasms are lacking. We collaborated with patients to develop a smartphone-based app as a tailored solution. The app provides biofeedback based on heart rate variability-driven stress level estimations. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a biofeedback-driven smartphone stress management app on cardiac symptoms in women with coronary vasospasms. METHODS: We enrolled 117 women aged 18 to 70 years diagnosed with coronary vasospasms, as confirmed by a gold standard coronary function test. A multicenter, single-sequence, 2-period crossover study was conducted, comprising a 4-week control period followed by a 4-week period using the Wavy intervention app. The intervention comprised breathing-based exercises that were prompted when measured stress levels were too high. The primary outcome was the Seattle Angina Questionnaire Summary Score, and the secondary outcomes included the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey and the Perceived Stress Scale-10 items. Additionally, the user experience and the impact of the breathing exercise on heart rate variability were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients completed the study, yet no significant improvements were observed in the Seattle Angina Questionnaire following the intervention period, with the control group scores at 50.4 (SD 15.4) and the intervention group scores at 50.9 (SD 15.0; P=.92). Similarly, no differences were found in the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey and the Perceived Stress Score. However, the 1236 breathing relaxation exercises performed during the study led to a significant improvement in heart rate variability, as indicated by a median root mean square of successive differences increase from 18.59 (IQR 8.38-36.58) milliseconds before the exercises to 34.93 (IQR 24.19-50.64) milliseconds after the exercises (z=-13.72; P<.001). Furthermore, two-thirds of participants (68/102, 66.7%) indicated that they would use a more refined version of the app in the future. CONCLUSIONS: A 4-week intervention using the Wavy app did not significantly alleviate anginal symptoms in female patients with coronary vasospasms. However, the breathing exercises demonstrated a notable improvement in heart rate variability, suggesting a reduction in stress levels. Patient feedback indicated broad support for the app and its wearable-based functionality, emphasizing the need for substantial refinements. Future development should incorporate patient perspectives to optimize the app as a comprehensive lifestyle management tool. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06171893; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT06171893.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.376 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicCardiac Health and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→