ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2024
Impact of age and comorbid heart failure on the utility of smart voice-assistant devices.
Article in European heart journal. Digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04508972 (Voice-based Identification of Clinical Features Requiring Emergent Action in Patients With Suspected COVID-19 Infection), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Voice-based Identification of Clinical Features Requiring Emergent Action in Patients With Suspected COVID-19 Infection (VOICE-COVID) I and II Study
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physicians as context engineers in the era of generative AI.Nature medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence and digital health in heart failure: advances in diagnosis, monitoring, phenotyping, and digital biomarkers.Heart failure reviews · 2026Review
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
Aims: The accuracy of voice-assisted technologies, such as Amazon Alexa, to collect data in patients who are older or have heart failure (HF) is unknown. The aim of this study is to analyse the impact of increasing age and comorbid HF, when compared with younger participants and caregivers, and how these different subgroups classify their experience using a voice-assistant device, for screening purposes. Methods and results: Subgroup analysis (HF vs. caregivers and younger vs. older participants) of the VOICE-COVID-II trial, a randomized controlled study where participants were assigned with subsequent crossover to receive a SARS-CoV2 screening questionnaire by Amazon Alexa or a healthcare personnel. Overall concordance between the two methods was compared using unweighted kappa scores and percentage of agreement. From the 52 participants included, the median age was 51 (34-65) years and 21 (40%) were HF patients. The HF subgroup showed a significantly lower percentage of agreement compared with caregivers (95% vs. 99%, Conclusion: This subgroup analysis highlights important differences in the performance of a voice-assistant-based technology in an older and comorbid HF population. Younger individuals and caregivers, serving as facilitators, have the potential to bridge the gap and enhance the integration of these technologies into clinical practice. Study Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04508972.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.