ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Remote Auscultation of Heart and Lungs as an Acceptable Alternative to Legacy Measures in Quarantined COVID-19 Patients-Prospective Evaluation of 250 Examinations.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Televisit with TytoHome™ device in medically complex child in long-term mechanical ventilation: a pilot study.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
- Leveraging User-Friendly Mobile Medical Devices to Facilitate Early Hospital Discharges in a Pediatric Setting: A Randomized Trial Study Protocol.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Tele-medicine controlled hospital at home is associated with better outcomes than hospital stay.PloS one · 2024Article
- Interpretation of Heart and Lungs Sounds Acquired via Remote, Digital Auscultation Reached Fair-to-Substantial Levels of Consensus among Specialist Physicians.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The role of digital technology in surgical home hospital programs.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Review
- Evaluating remote healthcare practices: Experiences and recommendations of healthcare professionals on smart applications.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the assimilation of telemedicine platforms into medical practice. Nevertheless, research-based evidence in this field is still accumulating. This was a prospective, cross-sectional comparative assessment of a remote physical examination device used mainly for heart and lung digital auscultation. We analyzed usage patterns, user (physician) subjective appreciation and compared it to legacy measures. Eighteen physicians (median age 36 years (IQR 32-45): two interns, seven residents and nine senior physicians; eleven internists, five geriatricians and two pediatricians) executed over 250 remote physical examinations. Their median work duration with quarantined patients was 60 days (IQR 45-60). The median number of patients examined by a single physician was 17 (IQR 10-34). Regarding overall estimation, all participants tended to prefer the remote examination in the setting of quarantined patients (median 6, IQR 3.75-8), while no statistically significant difference was demonstrated compared to the indifference value (
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.