SynthesisSystematic reviews2016
Telemedicine with clinical decision support for critical care: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Photography tele-transmission by regular ambulance staff for the management of mild traumatic injury: the NiCEPHORE randomised-controlled trial.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2022Trial
- Telemedicine in adult intensive care: A systematic review of patient-relevant outcomes and methodological considerations.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- How to Evaluate a Regional Telemedical Care Network Focusing on Critically Ill Children? Results from the Consensus-Based Development of an Evaluation Design.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Peer-to-peer tele-consultative services for critical care, Afghanistan, Kenya, Pakistan, United Republic of Tanzania.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2025Article
- Implementing Telemedicine Intervention in Neonatal Intensive Care Units: Augmented Teleconsultation and Real-Time Monitoring Experience.Telemedicine reports · 2025Article
- Article
- 21st century critical care medicine: An overview.World journal of critical care medicine · 2024Review
- Under the Tech Umbrella: Assessing the Landscape of Telemedicine Innovations (Telemechron Study).Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- The Integration of Clinical Decision Support Systems Into Telemedicine for Patients With Multimorbidity in Primary Care Settings: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Teleneurocritical Care for Patients with Large Vessel Occlusive Ischemic Stroke Treated by Thrombectomy.Neurocritical care · 2023Article
- Teleneurocritical Care: Lessons Learned in Standardizing Care.Neurocritical care · 2022Article
- Telemedicine in Intensive Care Units: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Review of Systematic Reviews in the Field of Telemedicine.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2021Article
- Telemedicine in Intensive Care Units: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2020Article
- Remote Surveillance Technologies: Realizing the Aim of Right Patient, Right Data, Right Time.Anesthesia and analgesia · 2019Review
- Digital maturity: are we ready to use technology in the NHS?Future healthcare journal · 2017Article
- Telemedicine/Virtual ICU: Where Are We and Where Are We Going?Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journalReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTelemedicine applications aim to address variance in clinical outcomes and increase access to specialist expertise. Despite widespread implementation, there is little robust evidence about cost-effectiveness, clinical benefits, and impact on quality and safety of critical care telemedicine. The primary objective was to determine the impact of critical care telemedicine (with clinical decision support available 24/7) on intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital mortality and length of stay in adults and children. The secondary objectives included staff and patient experience, costs, protocol adherence, and adverse events.
methodsData sources included MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library databases, Health Technology Assessment Database, Web of Science, OpenGrey, OpenDOAR, and the HMIC through to December 2015. Randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies were eligible for inclusion. Eligible studies reported on differences between groups using the telemedicine intervention and standard care. Two review authors screened abstracts and assessed potentially eligible studies using Cochrane guidance.
resultsTwo controlled before-after studies met the inclusion criteria. Both were assessed as high risk of bias. Meta-analysis was not possible as we were unable to disaggregate data between the two studies. One study used a non-randomised stepped-wedge design in seven ICUs. Hospital mortality was the primary outcome which showed a reduction from 13.6 % (CI, 11.9-15.4 %) to 11.8 % (CI, 10.9-12.8 %) during the intervention period with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 0.40 (95 % CI, 0.31-0.52; p = .005). The second study used a non-randomised, unblinded, pre-/post-assessment of telemedicine interventions in 56 adult ICUs. Hospital mortality (primary outcome) reduced from 11 to 10 % (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.84; CI, 0.78-0.89; p = <.001).
conclusionsThis review highlights the poor methodological quality of most studies investigating critical care telemedicine. The results of the two included studies showed a reduction in hospital mortality in patients receiving the intervention. Further multi-site randomised controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies with accompanying process evaluations are urgently needed to determine effectiveness, implementation, and associated costs.
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42014007406.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.