%0 Journal Article
%@ 2291-5222
%I JMIR Publications
%V 7
%N 9
%P e13238
%T Comparison of On-Site Versus Remote Mobile Device Support in the Framingham Heart Study Using the Health eHeart Study for Digital Follow-up: Randomized Pilot Study Set Within an Observational Study Design
%A Spartano,Nicole L
%A Lin,Honghuang
%A Sun,Fangui
%A Lunetta,Kathryn L
%A Trinquart,Ludovic
%A Valentino,Maureen
%A Manders,Emily S
%A Pletcher,Mark J
%A Marcus,Gregory M
%A McManus,David D
%A Benjamin,Emelia J
%A Fox,Caroline S
%A Olgin,Jeffrey E
%A Murabito,Joanne M
%+ Section of Endocrinology, Diabetes, Nutrition, and Weight Management, Boston University School of Medicine, 720 Harrison Ave, Suite 8100, Boston, MA, United States, 1 3154152040, spartano@bu.edu
%K wearable electronic devices
%K cell phone
%K fitness trackers
%K electrocardiography
%K epidemiology
%D 2019
%7 30.9.2019
%9 Original Paper
%J JMIR Mhealth Uhealth
%G English
%X Background: New electronic cohort (e-Cohort) study designs provide resource-effective methods for collecting participant data. It is unclear if implementing an e-Cohort study without direct, in-person participant contact can achieve successful participation rates. Objective: The objective of this study was to compare 2 distinct enrollment methods for setting up mobile health (mHealth) devices and to assess the ongoing adherence to device use in an e-Cohort pilot study. Methods: We coenrolled participants from the Framingham Heart Study (FHS) into the FHS–Health eHeart (HeH) pilot study, a digital cohort with infrastructure for collecting mHealth data. FHS participants who had an email address and smartphone were randomized to our FHS-HeH pilot study into 1 of 2 study arms: remote versus on-site support. We oversampled older adults (age ≥65 years), with a target of enrolling 20% of our sample as older adults. In the remote arm, participants received an email containing a link to enrollment website and, upon enrollment, were sent 4 smartphone-connectable sensor devices. Participants in the on-site arm were invited to visit an in-person FHS facility and were provided in-person support for enrollment and connecting the devices. Device data were tracked for at least 5 months. Results: Compared with the individuals who declined, individuals who consented to our pilot study (on-site, n=101; remote, n=93) were more likely to be women, highly educated, and younger. In the on-site arm, the connection and initial use of devices was ≥20% higher than the remote arm (mean percent difference was 25% [95% CI 17-35] for activity monitor, 22% [95% CI 12-32] for blood pressure cuff, 20% [95% CI 10-30] for scale, and 43% [95% CI 30-55] for electrocardiogram), with device connection rates in the on-site arm of 99%, 95%, 95%, and 84%. Once connected, continued device use over the 5-month study period was similar between the study arms. Conclusions: Our pilot study demonstrated that the deployment of mobile devices among middle-aged and older adults in the context of an on-site clinic visit was associated with higher initial rates of device use as compared with offering only remote support. Once connected, the device use was similar in both groups. 
%M 31573928
%R 10.2196/13238
%U https://mhealth.jmir.org/2019/9/e13238
%U https://doi.org/10.2196/13238
%U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31573928