Trial reportAnnals of global health2019
Personalized E-Coaching in Cardiovascular Risk Reduction: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Annals of global health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01911910 (Heart Attack Prevention Programme for You), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Heart Attack Prevention Programme for You (HAPPY) London
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness of digital health interventions for telemedicine/telehealth for managing blood pressure in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Components, prospects and challenges of personalized prevention.Frontiers in public health · 2023Review
- Using clinical prediction models to personalise lifestyle interventions for cardiovascular disease prevention: A systematic literature review.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo assess whether electronic (e-) coaching, using personalized web-based lifestyle and risk factor counselling with additional email prompts, provides additional risk reduction when added to standard of care (SOC) in individuals at increased risk.
methodsBetween June 2013 and May 2015, 402 participants were allocated 1:1 to e-coaching and SOC versus SOC. Participants free of manifest cardiovascular disease, with internet access, and a 10-year QRISK2 cardiovascular risk of ≥10% were enrolled. Change in oscillometric carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV) from baseline to six months was the primary endpoint. Secondary outcomes included change in blood pressure (BP), weight, and risk scores. Analysis was by intention to treat.
resultsMean (±SD) age was 65.5 (5.6) years with 37% females. Primary outcome data were available for 94%. There was no difference in PWV reductions between e-coaching and standard of care groups (-0.16 m/s vs. -0.25 m/s, 95% confidence interval -0.39 to 0.22, p = 0.56). There were no differences in the improvement between groups for BP, weight, Framingham, or QRISK2 scores. Pulse wave velocity change was more favorable in those with a higher level of education (p = 0.04), but was not associated with age, gender, presence of diabetes, baseline QRISK2 score, or logins to the website.
conclusionsIn individuals at increased cardiovascular risk, a comprehensive 'health check' program modestly reduced future risk. Personalized e-coaching did not provide added risk reduction. Currently there is no evidence to routinely recommend e-coaching in cardiovascular health check programs.
trial registrationHAPPY London ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01911910.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.