Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41134574›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2025

Digital Emotion Regulation Interventions for Patients With Congenital Heart Disease: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Luise Pruessner, Steffen Hartmann, Anna-Lena Ehmann, Sven Barnow, Ulrike M M Bauer, Paul C Helm

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

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 NCT05862909 (Efficacy of a Web-Based Emotion Regulation Intervention for Patients With Congenital Heart Disease), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05862909 nacompletednot on this map

Efficacy of a Web-Based Emotion Regulation Intervention for Patients With Congenital Heart Disease: A Three-Armed Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorHeidelberg UniversityRan2022 to 2024Enrolled524ConditionsCongenital Heart Disease, Emotional RegulationArmsCHD-specific web-based emotion regulation intervention, General web-based emotion regulation intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Luise PruessnerDepartment of Psychology, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Steffen HartmannDepartment of Psychology, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Anna-Lena EhmannDepartment of Congenital Heart Disease, Pediatric Cardiology, Deutsches Herzzentrum der Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Sven BarnowDepartment of Psychology, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Ulrike M M BauerNational Register for Congenital Heart Defects, Berlin, Germany.
Paul C HelmNational Register for Congenital Heart Defects, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Congenital heart disease (CHD) is associated with emotional distress and reduced quality of life, yet evidence-based psychosocial treatments are limited. Digital emotion regulation interventions may offer a scalable solution. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of tailored and general digital emotion regulation interventions compared with usual care for patients with CHD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 3-arm, parallel-group randomized clinical trial was conducted from August 5, 2022, to October 21, 2024. Adults (≥18 years) with CHD were recruited nationwide in Germany. Interventions: Participants were randomized to a 4-week digital program with daily exercises to improve emotion regulation flexibility, delivered in a tailored or general format, or to usual CHD care. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in emotion regulation difficulties. Secondary outcomes were the changes in emotion regulation repertoire, well-being, life satisfaction, anxiety, depression, stress, and illness identity. Analyses followed an intention-to-treat approach. Results: Of 1043 individuals screened, 524 were randomized (mean [SD] age, 35.2 [12.7] years; 364 women [69.5%]). At postintervention, the tailored program reduced emotion regulation difficulties compared with usual care (Cohen d = -0.45; 95% CI, -0.72 to -0.18; P = .001), whereas the general program did not. For secondary outcomes, the tailored program improved emotion regulation repertoire (Cohen d = 0.49; 95% CI, 0.18-0.78; P < .001), well-being (Cohen d = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.11-0.67; P = .006), life satisfaction (Cohen d = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.08-0.66; P = .01), anxiety (Cohen d = -0.38; 95% CI, -0.63 to -0.13; P = .003), depression (Cohen d = -0.40; 95% CI, -0.68 to -0.12; P = .005), and stress (Cohen d = -0.54; 95% CI, -0.86 to -0.22; P < .001), whereas the general program reduced stress only (Cohen d = -0.32; 95% CI, -0.58 to -0.05; P = .02). At follow-up, all primary and secondary gains for the tailored program were maintained, whereas the general program improved emotion regulation difficulties, anxiety, depression, and stress. Direct comparisons of the active interventions showed no difference in the primary outcome but greater gains in emotion regulation repertoire favoring the tailored program (postintervention: Cohen d = 0.26; 95% CI, 0.07-0.45; P = .007; follow-up: Cohen d = 0.33; 95% CI, 0.11-0.55; P = .004). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of adults with CHD, a tailored digital intervention improved emotion regulation and psychosocial outcomes at postintervention and at follow-up, whereas a general program showed more delayed benefits. These findings highlight the potential of tailored digital emotion regulation tools to meet the specific mental health needs of people living with chronic medical conditions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05862909.

Indexed as

Emotional RegulationHeart Defects, CongenitalAdultFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID41134574
PMCPMC12552930

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.