Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32016115›Full record

ReviewBioMed research international2020

Telemonitoring Interventions in COPD Patients: Overview of Systematic Reviews.

Xuanlin Li, Yang Xie, Hulei Zhao, Hailong Zhang, Xueqing Yu, Jiansheng Li

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BioMed research international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Workshops as Tools for Developing Collaborative Practice across Professional Social Worlds in Telemonitoring.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Remote Patient Monitoring for the Detection of COPD Exacerbations.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2020
    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

6 authors.

Xuanlin LiCo-Construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases by Henan & Education Ministry of China, Zhengzhou, Henan 450046, China.
Yang XieCo-Construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases by Henan & Education Ministry of China, Zhengzhou, Henan 450046, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6444-6090
Hulei ZhaoCo-Construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases by Henan & Education Ministry of China, Zhengzhou, Henan 450046, China.
Hailong ZhangCo-Construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases by Henan & Education Ministry of China, Zhengzhou, Henan 450046, China.
Xueqing YuCo-Construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases by Henan & Education Ministry of China, Zhengzhou, Henan 450046, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0281-322X
Jiansheng LiCo-Construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases by Henan & Education Ministry of China, Zhengzhou, Henan 450046, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2714-9353

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe role of telemonitoring interventions (TIs) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been studied in many systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs), but robust conclusions have not been reached due to wide variations in scopes, qualities, and outcomes. The aim of this overview was to determine the effectiveness of TIs on COPD patients.

methodsPubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for all reviews on the topic of TI in treating COPD from inception to July 8, 2019, without restrictions on language. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the retrieved literature studies were screened to select SRs and MAs of randomized control trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of TIs in COPD patients. The methodological quality of SRs and MAs was assessed with the AMSTAR-2 tool, and the strength of evidence was assessed with the grades of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) system for concerned outcomes in terms of mortality, quality of life (SGRQ total scores), exercise capacity (6MWD), and exacerbation-related outcomes (hospitalizations, exacerbation rate, and emergency room visits).

resultsOur overview included eight SRs and MAs published in 2011 to 2019, from 95 RCTs involving 10632 participants. After strict evaluation by the AMSTAR-2 tool, 75% of the SRs and MAs in this overview had either low or critically low methodological quality. The effects of TIs for COPD on mortality, quality of life, exercise capacity, and exacerbation-related outcomes are limited, and all of these outcomes scored either low or very low quality of evidence on the GRADE system.

conclusionsThere might be insufficient evidence to support the effectiveness of TIs for COPD currently, but the results of this overview should be interpreted dialectically and prudently, and the role of TIs in COPD needs further exploration.

Indexed as

TelemetryEarly Medical InterventionHospitalizationHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveQuality of LifeSystematic Reviews as TopicTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID32016115
PMCPMC6988702

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.