ArticleJMIR cardio2025
Technology Readiness Level and Self-Reported Health in Recipients of an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator: Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in JMIR cardio, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patients' Perspectives on Applications of AI and Personalized Medicine in Life-Threatening Heart Disease: European Cross-Sectional Patient Questionnaire Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Measuring eHealth Literacy in the European Economic Area, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Digital Readiness Among 3555 Individuals With Hip or Knee Osteoarthritis Initiating a Supervised Education and Exercise Therapy Programme: A Cross-Sectional Study.Musculoskeletal care · 2025Article
- Article
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
backgroundApproximately 200,000 implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are implanted annually worldwide, with around 20% of recipients experiencing significant psychological distress. Despite this, there are no ICD guidelines addressing mental health as part of rehabilitation programs, which primarily focus on educating patients about their condition and prognosis. There is a need to include elements such as emotional distress, social interactions, and the future use of technologies like apps and virtual communication in ICD rehabilitation, without increasing the burden on health care professionals.
objectiveThis study aimed to demonstrate how data from the Readiness for Health Technology Index (READHY), combined with sociodemographic characteristics and exploratory interviews, can be used to construct profiles of recipients of an ICD, describing their ability to manage their condition, their need for support, and their digital health literacy. This aims to enhance health care professionals' understanding of different patient archetypes, serving as guidance in delivering personalized services tailored to the needs, resources, and capabilities of individual recipients of ICDs.
methodsOverall, 79 recipients of an ICD participated in a survey assessing technology readiness using the READHY. The survey also collected sociodemographic data such as age, sex, and educational level. Self-reported health was measured using a Likert scale. Cluster analysis categorized participants into profiles based on their READHY scores. Correlations between READHY scores and self-reported health were examined. In addition, qualitative interviews with representatives from different readiness profiles provided deeper insights.
resultsFour technology readiness profiles were found: (1) profile 1 (low digital health literacy, insufficient on 5 dimensions), (2) profile 2 (sufficient on all dimensions), (3) profile 3 (consistently sufficient readiness on all dimensions), and (4) profile 4 (insufficient readiness on 9 dimensions). Participants in profile 4, characterized by the lowest readiness levels, were significantly younger (P=.03) and had lower self-reported health (P<.001) than those in profile 3. A correlation analysis revealed that higher READHY scores were associated with better self-reported health across all dimensions. Qualitative interviews highlighted differences in self-management approaches and the experience of support between profiles, emphasizing the essential role of social support toward the rehabilitation journeys of recipients of an ICD. Two patient vignettes were created based on the characteristics from the highest and lowest profiles.
conclusionsUsing the READHY instrument to create patient profiles demonstrates how it can be used to make health care professionals aware of specific needs within the group of recipients of an ICD.
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.