Comparison of On-Site Versus Remote Mobile Device Support in the Framingham Heart Study Using the Health eHeart Study...

Area of Science:

• Digital health
• Clinical research methodology
• Mobile health (mHealth)

Background:

• Electronic cohort (e-Cohort) designs offer resource-effective data collection.
• The efficacy of e-Cohorts without in-person contact for successful participation remains unclear.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare two mobile health (mHealth) device enrollment methods.
• To assess ongoing device use adherence in an e-Cohort pilot study.

Main Methods:

• Coenrolled Framingham Heart Study (FHS) participants into the FHS-Health eHeart (HeH) pilot study.
• Randomized participants to remote or on-site support arms for mHealth device setup.
• Tracked device data for at least five months, oversampling older adults.

Main Results:

• On-site enrollment showed significantly higher initial device connection and use rates (20-43% higher) than remote enrollment.
• Device connection rates in the on-site arm were 99% (activity monitor) to 84% (electrocardiogram).
• Continued device use over five months was comparable between the remote and on-site arms.

Conclusions:

• On-site clinic visits enhance initial mobile device deployment and use in middle-aged and older adults within e-Cohorts.
• Remote support is less effective for initial device setup compared to in-person assistance.
• Once established, device adherence is similar regardless of initial enrollment method.