Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29339348›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2018

Evaluation Criteria of Noninvasive Telemonitoring for Patients With Heart Failure: Systematic Review.

Troskah Farnia, Marie-Christine Jaulent, Olivier Steichen

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review of Systematic Reviews in the Field of Telemedicine.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. First real-world experience with mobile health telemonitoring in adult patients with congenital heart disease.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2019
    Article
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

3 authors.

Troskah FarniaLaboratoire d'Informatique Médicale et Ingénierie des Connaissances en eSanté, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, Sorbonne Universités, Université Paris 13, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-5437-9472
Marie-Christine JaulentLaboratoire d'Informatique Médicale et Ingénierie des Connaissances en eSanté, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, Sorbonne Universités, Université Paris 13, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0003-4445-7494
Olivier SteichenLaboratoire d'Informatique Médicale et Ingénierie des Connaissances en eSanté, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, Sorbonne Universités, Université Paris 13, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-1185-0372

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTelemonitoring can improve heart failure (HF) management, but there is no standardized evaluation framework to comprehensively evaluate its impact.

objectiveOur objectives were to list the criteria used in published evaluations of noninvasive HF telemonitoring projects, describe how they are used in the evaluation studies, and organize them into a consistent scheme.

methodsArticles published from January 1990 to August 2015 were obtained through MEDLINE, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Articles were eligible if they were original reports of a noninvasive HF telemonitoring evaluation study in the English language. Studies of implantable telemonitoring devices were excluded. Each selected article was screened to extract the description of the telemonitoring project and the evaluation process and criteria. A qualitative synthesis was performed.

resultsWe identified and reviewed 128 articles leading to 52 evaluation criteria classified into 6 dimensions: clinical, economic, user perspective, educational, organizational, and technical. The clinical and economic impacts were evaluated in more than 70% of studies, whereas the educational, organizational, and technical impacts were studied in fewer than 15%. User perspective was the most frequently covered dimension in the development phase of telemonitoring projects, whereas clinical and economic impacts were the focus of later phases.

conclusionsTelemonitoring evaluation frameworks should cover all 6 dimensions appropriately distributed along the telemonitoring project lifecycle. Our next goal is to build such a comprehensive evaluation framework for telemonitoring and test it on an ongoing noninvasive HF telemonitoring project.

Indexed as

FemaleHeart FailureHumansMaleMonitoring, PhysiologicTelemedicineheart failureoutcome and process assessment (health care)program evaluationtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID29339348
PMCPMC6257336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.