Back

Effectiveness of a mobile health app on initiated antihypertensive medications in patients with untreated hypertension

Matsumura, K.; Nakagomi, A.; Yagi, E.; Yamada, N.; Funauchi, Y.; Kakehi, K.; Yoshida, A.; Kawamura, T.; Ueno, M.; Nakazawa, G.; Tabuchi, T.

2023-08-08 health informatics
10.1101/2023.08.03.23293628 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundFew effective tools have been identified that facilitate the initiation of antihypertensive medications in patients with untreated hypertension. To determine whether a mobile health (mHealth) application facilitates the initiation of antihypertensive medications in patients with untreated hypertension. MethodsWe analyzed a large, longitudinal, integrated database mainly comprising middle-aged, working people and their families. The database contained health checkup data, health insurance claims data, and mHealth app data. The mHealth app, kencom, is used to manage daily life logs (i.e. weight, number of steps) and to provide health information tailored to customers. Patients with untreated hypertension were defined using the baseline health checkup data. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the association between use of the mHealth app and the initiation of antihypertensive medications. ResultsAmong 50 803 eligible patients (mean age, 49 years; 78 % male) with a median follow-up period of 3.0 years. The rate of initiation of antihypertensive medication was 23.4 % vs. 18.5 % (p < 0.0001), which was significantly higher in the mHealth application group (n = 14 879) than in the non-user group (n = 35 924). Multivariable analysis revealed that usage of the mHealth app was associated with initiated antihypertensive medications (odds ratio 1.43, 95 % confidence interval 1.36-1.50). ConclusionIn patients with untreated hypertension, the use of the mHealth app, which was not dedicated to hypertension treatment, was associated with the initiation of antihypertensive medications.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.