Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35265897›Full record

ArticleCardiovascular digital health journal2021

Why digital health trials can fail: Lessons learned from a randomized trial of health coaching and virtual cardiac rehabilitation.

Christoph B Olivier, Stephanie K Middleton, Natasha Purington, Sumana Shashidhar, Jody Hereford, Kenneth W Mahaffey, Mintu P Turakhia

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiovascular digital health journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Home-based versus centre-based cardiac rehabilitation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Christoph B OlivierStanford Center for Clinical Research, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Stephanie K MiddletonStanford Center for Clinical Research, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Natasha PuringtonQuantitative Sciences Unit, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Sumana ShashidharStanford Center for Clinical Research, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Jody HerefordHereford Consulting, Boulder, CO.
Kenneth W MahaffeyStanford Center for Clinical Research, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Mintu P TurakhiaCenter for Digital Health, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Stanford University · USCenter for Clinical Research (United States) · USVA Palo Alto Health Care System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: We performed a trial to evaluate the efficacy of a blended intervention with personalized health coaching and virtual cardiac rehabilitation to improve medication adherence and risk factors. The trial was terminated early. Here, we describe findings from a root cause analysis and lessons learned. Methods: SmartGUIDE was an open-label, single-center trial that randomized participants with coronary artery disease who were prescribed a statin and/or P2Y12 inhibitor 1:1 to either usual care or the added use of a mobile app with components of cardiac rehabilitation paired with personal virtual coaching. The primary outcome was medication adherence: proportion of days covered (PDC). The planned sample size was 132. We performed a root cause analysis to evaluate processes from study development to closure. Results: During trial conduct, the technology start-up withdrew the intervention. The study was terminated early with 63 participants randomized and data from 26 available for analysis. The median PDC was high in both groups (intervention group 94%, interquartile range [IQR] 88%-96%; control group: 99%, IQR 95%-100%). Root cause analysis identified factors for not achieving trial objectives: key factors that limited enrollment (inclusion criteria, low penetration of compatible smartphones), participant retention or engagement (poor app product, insufficient technology support), and suboptimal choice of a technology partner (technology start-up's inexperience in health care, poor product design, inadequate fundraising). Conclusion: We identified important and preventable factors leading to trial failure. These factors may be common across digital health trials and may explain prior observations that many such trials are never completed. Careful vetting of technology partners and more pragmatic study designs may prevent these missteps.

Indexed as

AdherenceCardiovascular risk factorCoronary artery diseaseDigital healthDigital platformmHealthMobile health

Identifiers

PMID35265897
PMCPMC8890340
OpenAlexW3129181368

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.