Trial reportBMJ open quality2024
Randomised pilot study comparing a coach to SMARTPhone reminders to aid the management of heart failure (HF) patients: humans or machines.
Trial report in BMJ open quality, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Meta-Analysis on the Efficacy of Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation Combined With Pressure Support Ventilation in Treating Chronic Heart Failure.Clinical cardiology · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of Personalized Health Coaching Program in Patients With Frailty and Heart Failure: Rationale and Study Design.International journal of heart failure · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ambulatory management of congestive heart failure (HF) continues to be a challenging clinical problem. Recent studies have focused on the role of HF clinics, nurse practitioners and disease management programmes to reduce HF readmissions. This pilot study is a pragmatic factorial study comparing a coach intervention, a SMARTPHONE REMINDER system intervention and BOTH interventions combined to Treatment as USUAL (TAU). We determined that both modalities were acceptable to patients prior to randomisation. Fifty-four patients were randomised to the four groups. The COACH group had no readmissions for HF 6 months after enrolment compared with 18% for the SMARTPHONE REMINDER Group, 8% for the BOTH intervention group and 13% for TAU. Medium-to-high medication adherence was maintained in all four groups although sodium consumption was lower at 3 months for the COACH and combined (BOTH) groups. This pilot study suggests a beneficial effect on rehospitalisation with the use of support measures including coaches and telephone reminders that needs confirmation in a larger trial.
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.