Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41704580›Full record

ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2026

Effectiveness of remote monitoring for patients with a high risk of cardiovascular disease: a 12-month matched cohort study in primary care.

Nicoline E van Hattem, Margot M Rakers, Eric G Hiddink, Saskia le Cessie, Just A H Eekhof, Frank den Heijer, Niels H Chavannes, Hendrikus J A van Os, Douwe E Atsma, Tobias N Bonten

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European heart journal. Digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

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

10 authors.

Nicoline E van HattemDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands.
Margot M RakersDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8233-1150
Eric G HiddinkDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands.
Saskia le CessieDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2154-4923
Just A H EekhofDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands.
Frank den HeijerDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands.
Niels H ChavannesDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands.
Hendrikus J A van OsDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands.
Douwe E AtsmaNational Health Living Lab (NeLL), Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Tobias N BontenDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden 2333 ZA, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of remote monitoring using the Cardiovascular Risk Management (CVRM)-Box on blood pressure control, weight management, medication prescriptions, and consultation frequency in primary care patients at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Methods and results: In this matched cohort study, patients with a > 5% 10-year CVD mortality risk in primary care (2020-2024) were compared to propensity score-matched controls over 12 months. The CVRM-Box included smartphone-connected devices (blood pressure monitor, weighing scale, activity tracker) linked to general practitioner electronic health records.Compared to controls, the intervention group showed modest reductions in office-measured systolic {-1.1 mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI), -3.7 to -1.5]; Conclusion: While office measurements showed no additional blood pressure reduction, CVRM-Box measurements demonstrated significant decreases. The intervention also improved target blood pressure achievement, promoted weight reduction, increased antihypertensive use, and reduced consultation frequency.

Indexed as

Blood pressure controlChronic disease managementDigital healthPreventive careRemote monitoringRisk stratification

Identifiers

PMID41704580
PMCPMC12907927

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.