Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24228075›Full record

ReviewOntario health technology assessment series2013

Health technologies for the improvement of chronic disease management: a review of the Medical Advisory Secretariat evidence-based analyses between 2006 and 2011.

M Nikitovic, S Brener

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Ontario health technology assessment series, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Technology-assisted congestive heart failure care.Current heart failure reports · 2015
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

M Nikitovic
S Brener

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs part of ongoing efforts to improve the Ontario health care system, a mega-analysis examining the optimization of chronic disease management in the community was conducted by Evidence Development and Standards, Health Quality Ontario (previously known as the Medical Advisory Secretariat [MAS]).

objectiveThe purpose of this report was to identify health technologies previously evaluated by MAS that may be leveraged in efforts to optimize chronic disease management in the community. DATA SOURCES: The Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series and field evaluations conducted by MAS and its partners between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2011. REVIEW

methodsTechnologies related to at least 1 of 7 disease areas of interest (type 2 diabetes, coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, stroke, and chronic wounds) or that may greatly impact health services utilization were reviewed. Only technologies with a moderate to high quality of evidence and associated with a clinically or statistically significant improvement in disease management were included. Technologies related to other topics in the mega-analysis on chronic disease management were excluded. Evidence-based analyses were reviewed, and outcomes of interest were extracted. Outcomes of interest included hospital utilization, mortality, health-related quality of life, disease-specific measures, and economic analysis measures.

resultsEleven analyses were included and summarized. Technologies fell into 3 categories: those with evidence for the cure of chronic disease, those with evidence for the prevention of chronic disease, and those with evidence for the management of chronic disease.

conclusionsThe impact on patient outcomes and hospitalization rates of new health technologies in chronic disease management is often overlooked. This analysis demonstrates that health technologies can reduce the burden of illness; improve patient outcomes; reduce resource utilization intensity; be cost-effective; and be a viable contributing factor to chronic disease management in the community. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: People with chronic diseases rely on the health care system to help manage their illness. Hospital use can be costly, so community-based alternatives are often preferred. Research published in the Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series between 2006 and 2011 was reviewed to identify health technologies that have been effective or cost-effective in helping to manage chronic disease in the community. All technologies identified led to better patient outcomes and less use of health services. Most were also cost-effective. Two technologies that can cure chronic disease and 1 that can prevent chronic disease were found. Eight technologies that can help manage chronic disease were also found. Health technologies should be considered an important part of chronic disease management in the community.

Indexed as

Community Health ServicesDisease ManagementEvidence-Based MedicineHealth Services ResearchAblation TechniquesBariatric SurgeryBiomedical TechnologyChronic DiseaseCost-Benefit AnalysisDefibrillators, ImplantableDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Government AgenciesHeart DiseasesHospitalizationHumansNegative-Pressure Wound Therapy

Identifiers

PMID24228075
PMCPMC3817826
OpenAlexW2169706963

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.