Trial reportJAMA network open2025
Rehabilitation at Home Using Mobile Health for Older Adults Hospitalized for Ischemic Heart Disease: The RESILIENT Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03978130 (REhabilitation at Home uSIng mobiLe Health In oldEr Adults After hospitalizatioN for Ischemic hearT Disease), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
REhabilitation at Home uSIng mobiLe Health In oldEr Adults After hospitalizatioN for Ischemic hearT Disease
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness of interventions using activity trackers and smartphone applications for increasing physical activity in older adults with health conditions: a systematic review with meta-analysis.The Journal of frailty & aging · 2026Pooled it
- Effectiveness of Cardiac Telerehabilitation in Improving Functional Capacity, Quality Of Life and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients After Acute Coronary Syndrome and/or Coronary Revascularisation (PCI/CABG): A Systematic Review Comparing Telerehabilitation With Traditional Cardiac Rehabilitation.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Pooled it
- Adherence to Accelerometer Use in Older Adults Undergoing mHealth Cardiac Rehabilitation: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- Cardiac Rehabilitation-Current Paradigms and Challenges Across the Cardiovascular Continuum.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Burden of Residual Angina Among Older Adults With Ischemic Heart Disease in the United States: Findings From the RESILIENT Trial.Circulation. Population health and outcomes · 2026Article
- Application of Digital Health Technologies in Cardiac Rehabilitation for Patients With Coronary Heart Disease: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- The Effectiveness and Current Challenges of Home-Based Cardiac Telerehabilitation for Patients with Coronary Artery Disease: A Narrative Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
- Development of a Hospital-at-Home Digital Twin for Patients With Frailty: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Evolving strategies in cardiovascular disease prevention: 2025 American society for preventive cardiology highlights.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Review
- Sex and Gender-Based Differences in Outcomes of Cardiac Rehabilitation Following Acute Myocardial Infarction.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2025Review
- Article
- Benefits of wearable-based cardiac rehabilitation interventions in secondary prevention of coronary artery disease - a systematic review and meta-analysis.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Article
- Part 1-Cardiac Rehabilitation After an Acute Myocardial Infarction: Four Phases of the Programme-Where Do We Stand?Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Among older adults with ischemic heart disease, participation in traditional ambulatory cardiac rehabilitation (CR) remains low. While mobile health CR (mHealth-CR) provides a novel opportunity to deliver care, age-specific impairments to technology use may limit uptake, and efficacy data are currently lacking. Objective: To test whether mHealth-CR improves functional capacity in older adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: The RESILIENT phase 2, multicenter, randomized clinical trial recruited patients aged 65 years or older with ischemic heart disease (defined as a hospital visit for myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization) from 5 academic hospitals in New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts between January 9, 2020, and April 22, 2024. Intervention: Participants were randomized 3:1 to mHealth-CR or usual care. mHealth-CR consisted of commercially available software delivered on a tablet computer, coupled with remote monitoring and weekly exercise therapist telephone calls, delivered over a 3-month duration. As RESILIENT was a trial conducted in a routine care setting to inform decision-making, participants in both arms were also allowed to receive traditional CR at their cardiologist's discretion. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change from baseline to 3 months in functional capacity, measured by 6-minute walk distance (6MWD). Secondary outcomes were health status (12-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12]), residual angina, and impairment in activities of daily living. Results: A total of 400 participants (median age, 71.0 years [range, 65.0-91.0 years]; 291 [72.8%] male) were randomized to mHealth-CR (n = 298) or usual care (n = 102) and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Of those, 356 participants (89.0%) returned in person for 6MWD assessment at 3 months. For the primary outcome, there was no adjusted difference in 6MWD between participants receiving mHealth-CR vs usual care (15.6 m; 95% CI, -0.3 to 31.5 m; P = .06). Among subgroups, there was an improvement in 6MWD among women (36.6 m; 95% CI, 8.7-64.4 m). There were no differences in any secondary outcomes between groups (eg, adjusted difference in SF-12 physical component scores at 3 months: -1.9 points; 95% CI, -3.9 to 0.2 points). Based on inverse propensity score weighting, there was no effect of mHealth-CR on 6MWD among those who did not attend traditional CR (25.7 m; 95% CI, -8.7 to 60.2 m). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of mHealth-CR vs usual care, mHealth-CR did not significantly increase 6MWD or result in improvements in secondary outcomes. The findings suggest the older adult population may require more age-tailored mHealth strategies to effectively improve outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03978130.
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.