ArticleDigital health
Validation of an iCare Health Monitor smartphone application in the assessment of vital signs among stroke survivors in a poor-resource country.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Parental perceptions of a wearable vital signs monitor for observation of newborns: in-depth interviews in three tertiary hospitals, Southwest Nigeria.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Frequent and accurate monitoring of blood pressure (BP) is a vital part of stroke management. There is therefore the need for availability of simple, portable and accurate devices for monitoring BP at any point in time. Objective: To determine the validity and reliability of the iCare Health Monitor (iCHM) smartphone application in the measurement of BP, heart rate (HR) and respiratory rate (RR) amongst stroke survivors in Anambra State. Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey involving 86 stroke survivors (64.0% males; mean age = 65.23 ± 12.10 years) consecutively recruited from three conveniently selected centres in Anambra State. BP, PR and RR were assessed using both the standardised methods and iCHM. The parameters were reassessed with the iCHM after few minutes. Convergent validity and test-retest reliability of the iCHM were determined using Pearson product moment correlation and intra-class correlation coefficient respectively at an alpha level of 0.05. Results: The convergent validity of the iCHM was excellent in measuring systolic BP (SBP) ( Conclusion: The iCHM is a valid and reliable tool for assessing BP and HR (but not RR) among stroke survivors. Its use is therefore recommended especially in poor-resource countries where gadgets for assessing BP and PR might not easily be affordable and available.
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.