Heart Failure

Standardized Reporting in HF Noninvasive Remote Monitoring Trials — "The 6 Rs"

• Authors: HF Collaboratory + Canadian HF Society + ESC working group
• Journal / date: JACC: Heart Failure, May 2026 (Vol 14, No 5)
• DOI / URL: 10.1016/j.jchf.2025.102849 | PMID 41575400
• Source basis: Full text (JACC login)
• Study type: Multi-society consensus framework
• Scope: Standardized reporting template for noninvasive HF remote patient monitoring (RPM) studies and programs — to address mixed RPM trial results that may stem from opaque workflow design
• The "6 Rs" framework:

1. Representativeness of patients

2. Recording of ambulatory data

3. Relay to clinicians

4. Review by clinicians

5. Response (clinical action)

6. Recommendations from patients and providers

• Why it matters (clinical takeaway):
• Practical template for designing or auditing an RPM program — apply the 6 Rs to your current workflow; gaps in any "R" predict program failure.
• When evaluating new RPM trial reports, expect the 6 Rs in the methods; opaque workflow reporting should temper interpretation.
• When proposing institutional RPM programs (weight monitoring, BP, multi-parameter wearables), use the 6 Rs to scope workflow and staffing requirements.
• Caveats / limitations: Consensus framework, not evidence-based recommendations on RPM efficacy itself.
• Referenced trials pulled forward: None this pass.