ArticleInternational journal of medical informatics2020
The effect of remote patient monitoring on the primary care clinic visit frequency among adults with type 2 diabetes.
Article in International journal of medical informatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of smart healthcare in the continuum of care for type 2 diabetes mellitus: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Utilization of Telemedicine for Patients Receiving In-Center Hemodialysis in the United States.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2025Article
- Article
- Conditions for successful implementation of couple-based collaborative management model of diabetes among community-dwelling older Chinese: a qualitative comparative analysis.BMC geriatrics · 2023Article
- Long-term Effects of Remote Patient Monitoring in Patients Living with Diabetes: A Retrospective Look at Participants of the Mississippi Diabetes Telehealth Network Study.Telemedicine reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimsHealthcare organizations are increasingly using technology to assist in diabetes management based on telemedicine's proven ability to improve glycemic regulation, decrease cost, and overcome barriers to effective healthcare. Nevertheless, it remains unclear how telemedicine intersects with primary care. We aim to measure the impact of a remote monitoring program for diabetes on primary care delivery through analysis of primary care office visit frequency.
methodsPatients eligible to participate in our institution's remote diabetes monitoring program were identified and classified as enrolled or not enrolled (i.e. "usual care"). The number of scheduled and completed primary care office visits in the 12 months prior to and after the index date were measured for both groups. The index date was the enrollment date or, for the patients who received usual care, the next available enrollment session after eligibility screen. Two-sample t-tests were used to examine the change in frequency of office visits prior to and after enrollment for participants, as well as the difference in visit frequency between enrolled patients versus patients receiving usual care.
resultsThere was no statistical difference in the number of scheduled or completed primary care clinic visits before or after enrollment in telehealth. Furthermore, there was no difference in the number of scheduled or completed primary care visits between patients enrolled in telehealth versus those receiving usual care.
conclusionParticipation in telehealth has been shown to be associated with significant HbA1c reductions in prior work, yet our data suggest that remote monitoring is not associated with a change in primary care office visit frequency. This suggests that telehealth may improve diabetes management independently of primary care visits.
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.