Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30232108›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2018

Telehealth for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

Violeta Gaveikaite, Claudia Fischer, Helen Schonenberg, Steffen Pauws, Spyros Kitsiou, Ioanna Chouvarda, Nicos Maglaveras, Josep Roca

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. What will Happen in the World of COPD 2030?Turkish thoracic journal · 2019
    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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Violeta GaveikaiteLaboratory of Computing, Medical Informatics and Biomedical Imaging Technologies, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Claudia FischerResearch, Philips Electronics Nederland B.V., Eindhoven, Netherlands.
Helen SchonenbergResearch, Philips Electronics Nederland B.V., Eindhoven, Netherlands.
Steffen PauwsResearch, Philips Electronics Nederland B.V., Eindhoven, Netherlands.
Spyros KitsiouDepartment of Biomedical and Health Information Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Ioanna ChouvardaLaboratory of Computing, Medical Informatics and Biomedical Imaging Technologies, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Nicos MaglaverasLaboratory of Computing, Medical Informatics and Biomedical Imaging Technologies, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Josep RocaServicio de Neumología, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Philips (Netherlands) · NLAristotle University of Thessaloniki · GRHospital Clínic de Barcelona · ESNXP (Netherlands) · NLUniversity of Illinois Chicago · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a highly prevalent chronic disease characterised by persistent respiratory symptoms. A focus of COPD interventional studies is directed towards prevention of exacerbations leading to hospital readmissions. Telehealth as a method of remote patient monitoring and care delivery may be implemented to reduce hospital readmissions and improve self-management of disease. Prior reviews have not systematically assessed the efficacies of various telehealth functionalities in patients with COPD at different stages of disease severity. We aim to evaluate which COPD telehealth interventions, classified by their functionalities, are most effective in improving patient with COPD management measured by both clinical and resource utilisation outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic review which will include randomised controlled trials comparing the efficacy of telehealth interventions versus standard care in patients with COPD with confirmed disease severity based on forced expiratory volume(%) levels. An electronic search strategy will be used to identify trials published since 2000 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINHAL. Telehealth is described as remote monitoring and delivery of care where patient data/clinical information is routinely or continuously collected and/or processed, presented to the patient and transferred to a clinical care institution for feedback, triage and intervention by a clinical specialist. Two authors will independently screen articles for inclusion, assess risk of bias and extract data. We will merge studies into a meta-analysis if the interventions, technologies, participants and underlying clinical questions are homogeneous enough. We will use a random-effects model, as we expect some heterogeneity between interventions. In cases where a meta-analysis is not possible, we will synthesise findings narratively. We will assess the quality of the evidence for the main outcomes using GRADE. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics approval is not required. The findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018083671.

Indexed as

HumansMeta-Analysis as TopicPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as TopicTelemedicinechronic obstructive pulmonary diseasemeta-analysissystematic reviewtelehealthtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID30232108
PMCPMC6150147
OpenAlexW2890622791

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.