Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30913216›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2019

SMARThealth India: A stepped-wedge, cluster randomised controlled trial of a community health worker managed mobile health intervention for people assessed at high cardiovascular disease risk in rural India.

David Peiris, Devarsetty Praveen, Kishor Mogulluru, Mohammed Abdul Ameer, Arvind Raghu, Qiang Li, Stephane Heritier, Stephen MacMahon, Dorairaj Prabhakaran, Gari D Clifford and 5 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07461415 (CONNECT-HTN Trial - Coaching and Navigation by CHWs Through Telehealth for High-risk Hypertension), which is not on this map. Cited by 58 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT07461415 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

CONNECT-HTN Trial - Coaching and Navigation by CHWs Through Telehealth for High-risk Hypertension

TypeinterventionalSponsorWeill Medical College of Cornell UniversityRan2026 to 2029Enrolled3,620ConditionsHypertensionArmsCONNECT-HTN, Standard ED management
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

58 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

David PeirisThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6898-3870
Devarsetty PraveenThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Kishor MogulluruThe George Institute for Global Health, Hyderabad, India.
Mohammed Abdul AmeerThe George Institute for Global Health, Hyderabad, India.
Arvind RaghuInstitute of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Qiang LiThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Stephane HeritierSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Stephen MacMahonThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Dorairaj PrabhakaranCentre for Chronic Disease Control, New Delhi, India.
Gari D CliffordDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Rohina JoshiThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Pallab K MaulikThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Stephen JanThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Lionel TarassenkoInstitute of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Anushka PatelThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3825-4092
UNSW Sydney · AUGeorge Institute for Global Health · INThe George Institute for Global Health · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBGeorgia Institute of Technology · USLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBMonash University · AU

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust WT 088877/Z/09/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCardiovascular diseases (CVD) are rising in India resulting in major health system challenges.

methodsEighteen primary health centre (PHC) clusters in rural Andhra Pradesh were randomised over three, 6-month steps to an intervention comprising: (1) household CVD risk assessments by village-based community health workers (CHWs) using a mobile tablet device; (2) electronic referral and clinical decision support for PHC doctors; and (3) a tracking system for follow-up care. Independent data collectors screened people aged ≥ 40 years in 54 villages serviced by the PHCs to create a high CVD risk cohort (based on WHO risk charts and blood pressure thresholds). Randomly selected, independent samples, comprising 15% of this cohort, were reviewed at each 6-month step. The primary outcome was the proportion meeting systolic blood pressure (SBP) targets (<140mmHg).

findingsEight-four percent of the eligible population (n = 62,254) were assessed at baseline (18.4% at high CVD risk). Of those at high risk, 75.3% were followed up over two years. CHWs screened 85.9% of the baseline cohort and doctors followed up 70.0% of all high risk referrals. There was no difference in the proportion of people achieving SBP targets (41.2% vs 39.2%; adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.01 95% CI 0.76-1.35) or receiving BP-lowering medications in the intervention vs control periods respectively. There was a high discordance in risk scores generated by independent data collectors and CHWs, resulting in only 37.2% of the evaluation cohort exposed to the intervention. This discordance was mainly driven by fluctuating BP values (both normal variability and marked seasonal variations). In the pre-specified high risk concordant subgroup, there was greater use of BP-lowering medications in the intervention period (54.3% vs 47.9%, OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.03-1.44) but no impact on BP control.

conclusionsThe strategy was well implemented with increased treatment rates among high risk individuals assessed by CHWs, however effects on BP were not demonstrated. Use of guideline-recommended BP thresholds for identifying high risk individuals substantially affected the reproducibility of risk assessment, and thus the ability to reliably evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention. In addition, unanticipated seasonal variation in BP in the context of a stepped-wedge trial highlights the inherent risks of this study design.

trial registrationClinical Trials Registry of India CTRI/2013/06/ 003753.

Indexed as

AgedBlood PressureCardiovascular DiseasesCommunity Health WorkersFemaleHumansHypertensionIndiaMaleMiddle AgedRisk AssessmentRural PopulationTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID30913216
PMCPMC6435227
OpenAlexW2924610085

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.