Cited by 44Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesSodium Intake and Health

Efficacy of a mobile hypertension prevention delivery platform with human coaching

Toro-Ramos, T, Kim, Y, Wood, M, Rajda, J, Niejadlik, K, Honcz, J, Marrero, D, Fawer, A +1 more·2017·Journal of Human Hypertension

Abstract

This pilot study evaluated the efficacy of a Hypertension Prevention Program (HPP) administered through a mobile application platform with human coaching (app) on reduction in blood pressure and weight in 50 adults with prehypertension or hypertension. Participants were recruited into a 24-week mobile application intervention to administer the HPP between January 2016 and July 2016. Dietary elements of the programme were based on the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension. The programme included in-app human coaching with bi-weekly phone calls, meal logging, blood pressure tracking and educational material. Main outcome variables included change in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, hypertension category, and weight loss. Data were analysed between October 2016 and December 2016. The HPP yielded overall improvements in weight (-3.04±4.04 kg, P=<0.001), diastolic blood pressure (-5.06±11.89 mm Hg, P=0.004), and hypertension category (-0.48±0.74 mm Hg, P=<0.001). Sustained engagement of 80% resulted in significant reductions in systolic blood pressure (-7.75±12.56, P=<0.001) and weight (-3.73±4.01 kg, P<0.001) for programme completers, contributing to hypertension category change (-0.58±0.64 mm Hg, P<0.001). Mobile delivery of a lifestyle intervention for hypertension prevention showed short-term potential to reduce risk of hypertension, supporting the need for longer studies to investigate the use of mHealth lifestyle modification to reduce the risk of hypertension, a public health priority.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/jhh.2017.69

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 30 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Toro-Ramos, T., Kim, Y., Wood, M., Rajda, J., Niejadlik, K., Honcz, J., Marrero, D., Fawer, A., & Michaelides, A.
Affiliations
  • Noom (United States) (US)
  • Aetna (United States) (US)
  • University of Arizona (US)
Venue
Journal of Human Hypertension
Published
2017-10-03
Volume
31
Issue
12
Pages
795-800
ISSN
  • 0950-9240 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5527
OpenAlex
W2763066131
Cited by
44
References
30
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4
FWCI
7.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Human Hypertension (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Sodium Intake and Health
Keywords
hypertension prevention, mobile health, lifestyle intervention, prehypertension, blood pressure reduction, weight loss, DASH diet, dietary intervention, participant engagement
MeSH terms
Adult, Blood Pressure, Female, Humans, Hypertension, Male, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Weight Loss, Mobile Applications

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review