ReviewDigital health
Digital health technologies in home-based cardiac rehabilitation: A scoping review.
Review in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Advancements in digital health technologies (DHTs) hold promise for improving participation rates in home-based cardiac rehabilitation (HBCR). However, the current status of their application in the field of HBCR and existing knowledge gaps has remained unclear since 2019. Methods: This review adheres to Arksey and O'Malley's framework for scoping reviews. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases were systematically searched from 2019 to 2025. Search results were reported following the PRISMA-ScR checklist. Descriptive analysis was employed to summarize and interpret the data. Results: Twenty-two studies were included, conducted across Europe (n = 10), Asia (n = 6), North America (n = 5), and Oceania (n = 1). A total of 2996 participants were involved, with sample sizes ranging from 8 to 449. The intervention group had a mean age of 61.5 ± 10.1 years, mainly including patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and post-coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). The core component of HBCR interventions was exercise training (n = 21), delivered primarily at home (n = 13) with multidisciplinary teams (n = 17) and targeting individual participants (n = 18). Intervention duration was typically 12 weeks, with follow-up periods ranging from 12 to 52 weeks. Seven studies utilized theories, models, or frameworks and two employed behavior change techniques. The DHTs utilized included mobile applications (15/22, 68%), smartwatches (10/22, 45%), accelerometers (8/22, 36.4%), interactive web-based portals (7/22, 32%), email/short message service (SMS) (7/22, 32%), heart rate monitors (4/22, 18%), activity trackers (3/22, 14%), pedometers (2/22, 9.1%), ECG monitors (2/22,9.1%),etc. Common outcomes encompassed physical activity, physiological indicators, psychological health, quality of life, safety, adherence, feasibility. Conclusions: The application of DHTs in HBCR holds broad prospects and warrants further research. Future studies could focus on specific subgroups and high-risk populations to verify whether technology-assisted HBCR can be extended to more diverse cohorts and exert sustained positive impacts on broader health outcomes.
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.