ArticleClinical cardiology2022
Pragmatic randomized trial assessing the impact of digital health technology on quality of life in patients with heart failure: Design, rationale and implementation.
Article in Clinical cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Frequency and Predictors of Virtual Visits in Patients With Heart Failure Within a Large Health System: Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Comparative Systematic Review of Telehealth Delivery Models, Intervention Content, and Outcomes in Heart Failure Care.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Review
- Digital Solutions to Optimize Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy Prescriptions in Heart Failure Patients: Current Applications and Future Directions.Current heart failure reports · 2024Review
- Pragmatic randomized trial assessing the impact of digital health technology on quality of life in patients with heart failure: Design, rationale and implementation.Clinical cardiology · 2022Article
- The role of digital health in the cardiovascular learning healthcare system.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSelf-care and patient engagement are important elements of heart failure (HF) care, endorsed in the guidelines. Digital health tools may improve quality of life (QOL) in HF patients by promoting care, knowledge, and engagement. This manuscript describes the rationale and challenges of the design and implementation of a pragmatic randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of three digital health technologies in improving QOL for patients with HF. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesize that digital health interventions will improve QOL of HF patients through the early detection of warning signs of disease exacerbation, the opportunity of self-tracking symptoms, and the education provided, which enhances patient empowerment.
methodsUsing a fully electronic enrollment and consent platform, the trial will randomize 200 patients across HF clinics in the Yale New Haven Health system to receive either usual care or one of three digital technologies designed to promote self-management and provide critical data to clinicians. The primary outcome is the change in QOL as assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire at 3 months.
resultsFirst enrollment occurred in September 2021. Recruitment was anticipated to last 6-8 months and participants were followed for 6 months after randomization. Our recruitment efforts have highlighted the large digital divide in our population of interest.
conclusionAssessing clinical outcomes, patient usability, and ease of clinical integration of digital technologies will be beneficial in determining the feasibility of the integration of such technologies into the healthcare system.
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.