ArticleBMJ open2023
Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of combined asynchronous telemonitoring and patient-initiated care for spondyloarthritis: protocol for a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial (TeleSpA Study).
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04673825 (Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Monitoring Spondyloarthritis With the Integrated eHealth System SpA-Net), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 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.
Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Monitoring Spondyloarthritis With the Integrated eHealth System SpA-Net: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Near-real-time whole-genome sequencing in hospital infection control: a narrative review.Infection · 2026Review
- Evidence-based follow-up in axial spondyloarthritis: how much is (not) enough?Current opinion in rheumatology · 2026Review
- Rheumatology in the digital health era: status quo and quo vadis?Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2024Review
- Knowledge, perceptions, and practices of axial spondyloarthritis diagnosis and management among healthcare professionals: an online cross-sectional survey.Rheumatology international · 2024Article
- Evaluation of a hybrid telehealth care pathway for patients with axial spondyloarthritis including self-sampling at home: results of a longitudinal proof-of-concept mixed-methods study (TeleSpactive).Rheumatology international · 2024Article
- Recommendation to implementation of remote patient monitoring in rheumatology: lessons learned and barriers to take.RMD open · 2023Article
- Remote monitoring in rheumatology: seeing the right patient at the right time.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2023Article
- Student-led clinics and ePROs to accelerate diagnosis and treatment of patients with axial spondyloarthritis: results from a prospective pilot study.Rheumatology international · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, an accelerated uptake of remote monitoring strategies, replacing traditional face-to-face care, has been observed. However, data on the effects of remote care interventions for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases remain scarce and interpretation is hampered by study heterogeneity and research quality concerns. High-quality evidence is required to guide future implementation in clinical practice, with health economic analyses identified as an important knowledge gap. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing telemonitoring with conventional care for patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) are currently lacking. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: TeleSpA is a pragmatic, multicentre RCT investigating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of combined asynchronous telemonitoring and patient-initiated follow-up for patients with SpA, compared with conventional care. Two-hundred patients will be recruited at two hospitals and randomised (1:1) to the study intervention or standard care. The primary endpoint is a reduction in the number of follow-up visits by ≥25% in the intervention compared with standard care group, during a 1-year period. Secondary endpoints are (a) non-inferiority of the study intervention with regard to health outcomes, quality of care and patient-reported experience with care; and (b) cost-effectiveness of the intervention, evaluated through a prospective trial-based cost-utility analysis. In addition, experiences with the study intervention will be assessed among patients and healthcare providers, and factors associated with primary and secondary endpoints will be identified. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Medical Research Ethics Committee of the Academic Hospital Maastricht/Maastricht University (NL71041.068.19/METC 19-059). Results will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04673825.
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.