Evidence mapPaperPMID 38533994Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2024

Mobile phone text messaging for medication adherence in secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Julie Redfern, Qiang Tu, Karice Hyun, Matthew A Hollings, Nashid Hafiz, Clara Zwack, Caroline Free, Pablo Perel, Clara K Chow

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
13.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Guideline for Chronic Coronary Syndrome - 2025.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2025
    Article
  20. Stroke in Young Adults in Asia.Cerebrovascular diseases extra · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Julie RedfernSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Qiang TuSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Karice HyunSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Matthew A HollingsSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Nashid HafizSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Clara ZwackSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Caroline FreeDepartment of Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Pablo PerelDepartment of Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Clara K ChowWestmead Applied Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AULondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the leading cause of death globally, accounting for almost 18 million deaths annually. People with CVDs have a five times greater chance of suffering a recurrent cardiovascular event than people without known CVDs. Although drug interventions have been shown to be cost-effective in reducing the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events, adherence to medication remains suboptimal. As a scalable and cost-effective approach, mobile phone text messaging presents an opportunity to convey health information, deliver electronic reminders, and encourage behaviour change. However, it is uncertain whether text messaging can improve medication adherence and clinical outcomes. This is an update of a Cochrane review published in 2017.

objectivesTo evaluate the benefits and harms of mobile phone text messaging for improving medication adherence in people with CVDs compared to usual care. SEARCH

methodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases, and two trial registers. We also checked the reference lists of all primary included studies and relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The date of the latest search was 30 August 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with participants with established arterial occlusive events. We included trials investigating interventions using short message service (SMS) or multimedia messaging service (MMS) with the aim of improving adherence to medication for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. The comparator was usual care. We excluded cluster-RCTs and quasi-RCTs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were medication adherence, fatal cardiovascular events, non-fatal cardiovascular events, and combined CVD event. Secondary outcomes were low-density lipoprotein cholesterol for the effect of statins, blood pressure for antihypertensive drugs, heart rate for the effect of beta-blockers, urinary 11-dehydrothromboxane B2 for the antiplatelet effects of aspirin, adverse effects, and patient-reported experience. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN

resultsWe included 18 RCTs involving a total of 8136 participants with CVDs. We identified 11 new studies in the review update and seven studies in the previous version of the review. Participants had various CVDs including acute coronary syndrome, coronary heart disease, stroke, myocardial infarction, and angina. All studies were conducted in middle- and high-income countries, with no studies conducted in low-income countries. The mean age of participants was 53 to 64 years. Participants were recruited from hospitals or cardiac rehabilitation facilities. Follow-up ranged from one to 12 months. There was variation in the characteristics of text messages amongst studies (e.g. delivery method, frequency, theoretical grounding, content used, personalisation, and directionality). The content of text messages varied across studies, but generally included medication reminders and healthy lifestyle information such as diet, physical activity, and weight loss. Text messages offered advice, motivation, social support, and health education to promote behaviour changes and regular medication-taking. We assessed risk of bias for all studies as high, as all studies had at least one domain at unclear or high risk of bias. Medication adherence Due to different evaluation score systems and inconsistent definitions applied for the measurement of medication adherence, we did not conduct meta-analysis for medication adherence. Ten out of 18 studies showed a beneficial effect of mobile phone text messaging for medication adherence compared to usual care, whereas the other eight studies showed either a reduction or no difference in medication adherence with text messaging compared to usual care. Overall, the evidence is very uncertain about the effects of mobile phone text messaging for medication adherence when compared to usual care. Fatal cardiovascular events Text messaging may have little to no effect on fatal cardiovascular events compared to usual care (odds ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 1.45; 4 studies, 1654 participants; low-certainty evidence). Non-fatal cardiovascular events We found very low-certainty evidence that text messaging may have little to no effect on non-fatal cardiovascular events. Two studies reported non-fatal cardiovascular events, neither of which found evidence of a difference between groups. Combined CVD events We found very low-certainty evidence that text messaging may have little to no effect on combined CVD events. Only one study reported combined CVD events, and did not find evidence of a difference between groups. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol Text messaging may have little to no effect on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol compared to usual care (mean difference (MD) -1.79 mg/dL, 95% CI -4.71 to 1.12; 8 studies, 4983 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Blood pressure Text messaging may have little to no effect on systolic blood pressure (MD -0.93 mmHg, 95% CI -3.55 to 1.69; 8 studies, 5173 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and diastolic blood pressure (MD -1.00 mmHg, 95% CI -2.49 to 0.50; 5 studies, 3137 participants; very low-certainty evidence) when compared to usual care. Heart rate Text messaging may have little to no effect on heart rate compared to usual care (MD -0.46 beats per minute, 95% CI -1.74 to 0.82; 4 studies, 2946 participants; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS'

conclusionsDue to limited evidence, we are uncertain if text messaging reduces medication adherence, fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events, and combined cardiovascular events in people with cardiovascular diseases when compared to usual care. Furthermore, text messaging may result in little or no effect on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, blood pressure, and heart rate compared to usual care. The included studies were of low methodological quality, and no studies assessed the effects of text messaging in low-income countries or beyond the 12-month follow-up. Long-term and high-quality randomised trials are needed, particularly in low-income countries.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesCell PhoneMedication AdherenceRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSecondary PreventionText MessagingBiasHumansMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionReminder SystemsStroke

Identifiers

PMID38533994
PMCPMC10966941
OpenAlexW4393224311

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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 Socratic graph.