ReviewCurrent cardiovascular risk reports2021
Feasibility of Incorporating Voice Technology and Virtual Assistants in Cardiovascular Care and Clinical Trials.
Review in Current cardiovascular risk reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Virtual Assistant as a Companion for Stroke Survivors post Discharge: Thematic Analysis Highlights Expectations of Human Performance Pose a Key Barrier to Engagement.Cerebrovascular diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Review
- Article
- Defining health equity: A modern US perspective.iScience · 2024Review
- Impact of age and comorbid heart failure on the utility of smart voice-assistant devices.European heart journal. Digital health · 2024Article
- Review
- A Step Forward in Prehospital Electrocardiogram Development.JACC. Advances · 2023Article
- Voice-Based Screening for SARS-CoV-2 Exposure in Cardiovascular Clinics (VOICE-COVID-19-II): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Speech biomarkers of risk factors for vascular dementia in people with mild cognitive impairment.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewWith the rising cost of cardiovascular clinical trials, there is interest in determining whether new technologies can increase cost effectiveness. This review focuses on current and potential uses of voice-based technologies, including virtual assistants, in cardiovascular clinical trials. RECENT
findingsNumerous potential uses for voice-based technologies have begun to emerge within cardiovascular medicine. Voice biomarkers, subtle changes in speech parameters, have emerged as a potential tool to diagnose and monitor many cardiovascular conditions, including heart failure, coronary artery disease, and pulmonary hypertension. With the increasing use of virtual assistants, numerous pilot studies have examined whether these devices can supplement initiatives to promote transitional care, physical activity, smoking cessation, and medication adherence with promising initial results. Additionally, these devices have demonstrated the ability to streamline data collection by administering questionnaires accurately and reliably. With the use of these technologies, there are several challenges that must be addressed before wider implementation including respecting patient privacy, maintaining regulatory standards, acceptance by patients and healthcare providers, determining the validity of voice-based biomarkers and endpoints, and increased accessibility. SUMMARY: Voice technology represents a novel and promising tool for cardiovascular clinical trials; however, research is still required to understand how it can be best harnessed.
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.