ArticleNPJ digital medicine2021
A randomized trial examining the effect of predictive analytics and tailored interventions on the cost of care.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Data for Parametrization ofFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Pooled it
- Observational
- Beyond performance metrics: modeling outcomes and cost for clinical machine learning.NPJ digital medicine · 2021Article
- Predictive analytics and tailored interventions improve clinical outcomes in older adults: a randomized controlled trial.NPJ digital medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This two-arm randomized controlled trial evaluated the impact of a Stepped-Care intervention (predictive analytics combined with tailored interventions) on the healthcare costs of older adults using a Personal Emergency Response System (PERS). A total of 370 patients aged 65 and over with healthcare costs in the middle segment of the cost pyramid for the fiscal year prior to their enrollment were enrolled for the study. During a 180-day intervention period, control group (CG) received standard care, while intervention group (IG) received the Stepped-Care intervention. The IG had 31% lower annualized inpatient cost per patient compared with the CG (3.7 K, $8.1 K vs. $11.8 K, p = 0.02). Both groups had similar annualized outpatient costs per patient ($6.1 K vs. $5.8 K, p = 0.10). The annualized total cost reduction per patient in the IG vs. CG was 20% (3.5 K, $17.7 K vs. $14.2 K, p = 0.04). Predictive analytics coupled with tailored interventions has great potential to reduce healthcare costs in older adults, thereby supporting population health management in home or community settings.
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.