Trial reportBMC cardiovascular disorders2026
Comparison of mHealth-supported and centre-based cardiac rehabilitation in patients with stable coronary heart disease: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundHigh-intensity interval training (HIIT) is an effective exercise modality in cardiac rehabilitation; however, participation in conventional centre-based programs remains suboptimal due to barriers such as limited accessibility and adherence. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies may improve accessibility and supervision of exercise training. While previous studies have primarily focused on training modality, evidence comparing different delivery models of HIIT-based cardiac rehabilitation remains limited. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of mHealth-supported versus centre-based delivery of a standardized HIIT cardiac rehabilitation program in patients with stable coronary heart disease (CHD).
methodsBetween December 2024 and April 2025, 98 adults with stable CHD eligible for Phase II cardiac rehabilitation were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the control group (n = 49) or the intervention group (n = 49). Both groups performed the same standardized HIIT protocol; the control group received supervised centre-based rehabilitation, whereas the intervention group performed mHealth-supported home-based training with real-time monitoring and individualized feedback via the Xin'ankang mHealth platform. Primary outcomes included the six-minute walk distance (6MWD), cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) parameters, and SF-36 quality of life scores. Secondary outcomes included anxiety, depression, and sleep quality.
resultsBaseline characteristics were generally comparable between groups, although minor differences were observed in certain SF-36 domains. After adjustment for baseline values, the intervention group demonstrated significant improvements compared to the control group in sleep quality scores (3.17 ± 2.09 vs. 4.83 ± 2.09), peak METs (5.83 ± 0.09 vs. 4.94 ± 0.09), anaerobic threshold METs (4.29 ± 0.07 vs. 3.53 ± 0.07), peak VO₂ (20.12 ± 0.30 vs. 16.70 ± 0.30 ml/kg/min), and 6MWD (563.83 ± 3.21 vs. 531.49 ± 3.21 m) (all P < 0.05). Improvements in SF-36 scores were observed in several domains, although no significant difference was found in vitality or mental health. Subgroup analyses revealed consistent improvements across age groups, while a sex-specific difference was observed for changes in VO₂ peak.
conclusionCompared with centre-based delivery of the same HIIT program, mHealth-supported HIIT was associated with greater improvements in cardiopulmonary function, exercise capacity, and quality of life in patients with CHD. These findings suggest that delivery modality may influence the effectiveness of HIIT-based cardiac rehabilitation.
trial registrationClinical Trial Registration Number: ChiCTR2500104462, June 17, 2025.
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.