***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***DOCUMENTATION***

***EXAMPLES***

Input: We identified 24 RCTs involving 3739 participants which were included in the review. IHCAs had a significant positive effect on knowledge (SMD 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22 to 0.69), social support (SMD 0.35; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.52) and clinical outcomes (SMD 0.18; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.35). Results suggest it is more likely than not that IHCAs have a positive effect on self-efficacy (a person's belief in their capacity to carry out a specific action) (SMD 0.24; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.48). IHCAs had a significant positive effect on continuous behavioural outcomes (SMD 0.20; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.40). Binary behavioural outcomes also showed a positive effect for IHCAs, although this result was not statistically significant (OR 1.66; 95% CI 0.71 to 3.87). It was not possible to determine the effects of IHCAs on emotional or economic outcomes. IHCAs appear to have largely positive effects on users, in that users tend to become more knowledgeable, feel better socially supported, and may have improved behavioural and clinical outcomes compared to non-users. There is a need for more high quality studies with large sample sizes to confirm these preliminary findings, to determine the best type and best way to deliver IHCAs, and to establish how IHCAs have their effects for different groups of people with chronic illness.
Output:

This review sought to find out how such computer programmes, known as Interactive Health Communication Applications (IHCAs), might affect people with chronic disease. The review authors found that IHCAs improved users' knowledge, social support, health behaviours and clinical outcomes. It is also more likely than not that IHCAs improve users' self-efficacy (a person's belief in their capacity to carry out a specific action). It was not possible to determine whether IHCAs had any effect on emotional and economic outcomes. The included studies involved different IHCAs, with different characteristics, for a wide range of chronic diseases. There was variability in several of the outcomes, and the results should therefore be treated with some caution. There is a need for more large, high quality studies to confirm these preliminary findings, to determine the best type and best way to deliver IHCAs, and to establish how IHCAs have their effects for different groups of people with chronic illness.