Authorship Correction: Voice-Based Screening for SARS-CoV-2 Exposure in Cardiovascular Clinics (VOICE-COVID-19-II): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/41209.].

Voice-assisted Artificial Intelligence-enabled Screening for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Exposure in Cardiovascular Clinics: Primary Results of the VOICE-COVID-19-II Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Voice-assisted artificial intelligence-based systems may streamline clinical care among patients with heart failure (HF) and caregivers; however, randomized clinical trials are needed. We evaluated the potential for Amazon Alexa (Alexa), a voice-assisted artificial intelligence-based system, to conduct screening for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a HF clinic. METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 52 participants (patients and caregivers) from a HF clinic who were randomly assigned with a subsequent cross-over to receive a SARS-CoV-2 screening questionnaire via Alexa or health care personnel. The primary outcome was overall response concordance, as measured by the percentage of agreement and unweighted kappa scores between groups. A postscreening survey evaluated comfort with using the artificial intelligence-based device. In total, 36 participants (69%) were male, the median age was 51 years (range 34-65 years) years and 36 (69%) were English speaking. Twenty-one participants (40%) were patients with HF. For the primary outcome, there were no statistical differences between the groups: Alexa-research coordinator group 96.9% agreement and unweighted kappa score of 0.92 (95% confidence interval 0.84-1.00) vs research coordinator-Alexa group 98.5% agreement and unweighted kappa score of 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.88-1.00) (P value for all comparisons > .05). Overall, 87% of participants rated their screening experience as good or outstanding. CONCLUSIONS: Alexa demonstrated comparable performance to a health care professional for SARS-CoV-2 screening in a group of patients with HF and caregivers and may represent an attractive approach to symptom screening in this population. Future studies evaluating such technologies for other uses among patients with HF and caregivers are warranted. NCT04508972.

Attitudes About Artificially Intelligent Interactive Voice Response Systems Using Amazon Alexa in Cardiovascular Clinics: Insights from the VOICE-COVID-19 Study.

The acceptability of artificially intelligent interactive voice response (AI-IVR) systems in cardiovascular research settings is unclear. As a result, we evaluated peoples' attitudes regarding the Amazon Echo Show 8 device when used for electronic data capture in cardiovascular clinics. Participants were recruited following the Voice-Based Screening for SARS-CoV-2 Exposure in Cardiovascular clinics study. Overall, 215 people enrolled and underwent screening (mean age 46.1; 55% females) in the VOICE-COVID study and 58 people consented to participate in a post-screening survey. Following thematic analysis, four key themes affecting AI-IVR acceptability were identified. These were difficulties with communication (44.8%), limitations with available interaction modalities (41.4%), barriers with the development of therapeutic relationships (25.9%), and concerns with universality and accessibility (8.6%). While there are potential concerns with the use of AI-IVR technologies, these systems appeared to be well accepted in cardiovascular clinics. Increased development of these technologies could significantly improve healthcare access and efficiency.

Voice-Based Screening for SARS-CoV-2 Exposure in Cardiovascular Clinics (VOICE-COVID-19-II): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the health care system, limiting health care resources such as the availability of health care professionals, patient monitoring, contact tracing, and continuous surveillance. As a result of this significant burden, digital tools have become an important asset in increasing the efficiency of patient care delivery. Digital tools can help support health care institutions by tracking transmission of the virus, aiding in the screening process, and providing telemedicine support. However, digital health tools face challenges associated with barriers to accessibility, efficiency, and privacy-related ethical issues. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the study design of an open-label, noninterventional, crossover, randomized controlled trial aimed at assessing whether interactive voice response systems can screen for SARS-CoV-2 in patients as accurately as standard screening done by people. The study aims to assess the concordance and interrater reliability of symptom screening done by Amazon Alexa compared to manual screening done by research coordinators. The perceived level of comfort of patients when interacting with voice response systems and their personal experience will also be evaluated. METHODS: A total of 52 patients visiting the heart failure clinic at the Royal Victoria Hospital of the McGill University Health Center, in Montreal, Quebec, will be recruited. Patients will be randomly assigned to first be screened for symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 either digitally, by Amazon Alexa, or manually, by the research coordinator. Participants will subsequently be crossed over and screened either digitally or manually. The clinical setup includes an Amazon Echo Show, a tablet, and an uninterrupted power supply mounted on a mobile cart. The primary end point will be the interrater reliability on the accuracy of randomized screening data performed by Amazon Alexa versus research coordinators. The secondary end point will be the perceived level of comfort and app engagement of patients as assessed using 5-point Likert scales and binary mode responses. RESULTS: Data collection started in May 2021 and is expected to be completed in fall 2022. Data analysis is expected to be completed in early 2023. CONCLUSIONS: The use of voice-based assistants could improve the provision of health services and reduce the burden on health care personnel. Demonstrating a high interrater reliability between Amazon Alexa and health care coordinators may serve future digital tools to streamline the screening and delivery of care in the context of other conditions and clinical settings. The COVID-19 pandemic occurs during the first digital era using digital tools such as Amazon Alexa for disease screening, and it represents an opportunity to implement such technology in health care institutions in the long term. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04508972; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04508972. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/41209.

Clinical Prediction Models for Heart Failure Hospitalization in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background Clinical prediction models have been developed for hospitalization for heart failure in type 2 diabetes. However, a systematic evaluation of these models' performance, applicability, and clinical impact is absent. Methods and Results We searched Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Tufts' clinical prediction registry through February 2021. Studies needed to report the development, validation, clinical impact, or update of a prediction model for hospitalization for heart failure in type 2 diabetes with measures of model performance and sufficient information for clinical use. Model assessment was done with the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool, and meta-analyses of model discrimination were performed. We included 15 model development and 3 external validation studies with data from 999 167 people with type 2 diabetes. Of the 15 models, 6 had undergone external validation and only 1 had low concern for risk of bias and applicability (Risk Equations for Complications of Type 2 Diabetes). Seven models were presented in a clinically useful manner (eg, risk score, online calculator) and 2 models were classified as the most suitable for clinical use based on study design, external validity, and point-of-care usability. These were Risk Equations for Complications of Type 2 Diabetes (meta-analyzed c-statistic, 0.76) and the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Heart Failure in Diabetes (meta-analyzed c-statistic, 0.78), which was the simplest model with only 5 variables. No studies reported clinical impact. Conclusions Most prediction models for hospitalization for heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes have potential concerns with risk of bias or applicability, and uncertain external validity and clinical impact. Future research is needed to address these knowledge gaps.

Use of Actigraphy (Wearable Digital Sensors to Monitor Activity) in Heart Failure Randomized Clinical Trials: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Actigraphy-based measurements of physiologic parameters may enable design of patient-centric heart failure (HF) clinical trials. Recently, the Heart Failure Collaboratory focused on recommendations for meaningful change and use of actigraphy as an end point in HF clinical trials. We aimed to evaluate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have quantified the impact of HF interventions using actigraphy. METHODS: Using a scoping review strategy, we evaluated the use of actigraphy in HF RCTs. Studies were identified through electronic searches of Embase, OVID Medline, PubMed, and Cochrane Review. Data on trial characteristics and results were collected. RESULTS: We identified 11 RCTs with a total of 1,455 participants. The risk of bias across the included trials was high overall. All trials had the primary outcomes reflecting measures of either physical activity (n = 8), sleep (n = 2), or both (n = 1). Five trials evaluated response to pharmacologic therapies compared with placebo, 3 evaluated physical activity interventions, 2 evaluated group or cognitive therapy, and 1 evaluated sleep-ventilation strategy. Sample sizes ranged from 30 to 619 participants. There was significant heterogeneity relating to device type, body placement site, and handling of missing actigraphy data. Duration of monitoring ranged from 48 hours to 12 weeks. None of the studies evaluating pharmacologic therapies (n = 5) demonstrated a significant improvement of actigraphy-based primary end point measurements. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant heterogeneity in the use, methodology, and results of actigraphy-based HF RCTs. Our results highlight the need to develop, standardize, and validate actigraphy-specific outcomes for use in HF clinical trials.

Voice-based screening for SARS-CoV-2 exposure in cardiovascular clinics.

Aims: Artificial intelligence (A.I) driven voice-based assistants may facilitate data capture in clinical care and trials; however, the feasibility and accuracy of using such devices in a healthcare environment are unknown. We explored the feasibility of using the Amazon Alexa ('Alexa') A.I. voice-assistant to screen for risk factors or symptoms relating to SARS-CoV-2 exposure in quaternary care cardiovascular clinics. Methods and results: We enrolled participants to be screened for signs and symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 exposure by a healthcare provider and then subsequently by the Alexa. Our primary outcome was interrater reliability of Alexa to healthcare provider screening using Cohen's Kappa statistic. Participants rated the Alexa in a post-study survey (scale of 1 to 5 with 5 reflecting strongly agree). This study was approved by the McGill University Health Centre ethics board. We prospectively enrolled 215 participants. The mean age was 46 years [17.7 years standard deviation (SD)], 55% were female, and 31% were French speakers (others were English). In total, 645 screening questions were delivered by Alexa. The Alexa mis-identified one response. The simple and weighted Cohen's kappa statistic between Alexa and healthcare provider screening was 0.989 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.982-0.997] and 0.992 (955 CI 0.985-0.999), respectively. The participants gave an overall mean rating of 4.4 (out of 5, 0.9 SD). Conclusion: Our study demonstrates the feasibility of an A.I. driven multilingual voice-based assistant to collect data in the context of SARS-CoV-2 exposure screening. Future studies integrating such devices in cardiovascular healthcare delivery and clinical trials are warranted. Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04508972.