Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34165912›Full record

SynthesisESC heart failure2021

Non-invasive home telemonitoring in patients with decompensated heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Teemu E I Drews, Jari Laukkanen, Tuomo Nieminen

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in ESC heart failure, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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.

Teemu E I DrewsDepartment of Cardiology, South Karelia Central Hospital, Lappeenranta, Finland.
Jari LaukkanenDepartment of Medicine, Central Finland Health Care District, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Tuomo NieminenPäijät-Häme Joint Authority for Health and Well-being, Lahti, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We planned this systematic review and meta-analysis to study an estimate of the effect of non-invasive home telemonitoring (TM) in the treatment of patients with recently decompensated heart failure (HF). A systematic literature search was conducted in the Medline, Cinahl, and Scopus databases to look for randomized controlled studies comparing TM with standard care in the treatment of patients with recently decompensated HF. The main outcomes of interest were all-cause hospitalizations and mortality. Eleven original articles met our eligibility criteria. The pooled estimate of the relative risk of all-cause hospitalization in the TM group compared with standard care was 0.95 (95% CI 0.84-1.08, P = 0.43) and the relative risk of all-cause death was 0.83 (95% CI 0.63-1.09, P = 0.17). There was significant clinical heterogeneity among primary studies. HF medication could be directly altered in three study interventions, and two of these had a statistically significant effect on all-cause hospitalizations. The pooled effect estimate of TM interventions on all-cause hospitalizations and all-cause death in patients with recently decompensated heart failure was neutral.

Indexed as

Heart FailureTelemedicineHospitalizationHumansHeart failureHospitalizationMortalityQuality of lifeRemote consultationTelemedicineTelemonitoringTelerehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID34165912
PMCPMC8497386

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.