ReviewFrontiers in public health2023
Cost-effectiveness analysis of a hand hygiene monitoring system in a tertiary pediatric hospital in Mexico.
Review in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence in multidisciplinary tumor boards enhancing decision making and clinical outcomes in oncology.iScience · 2025Review
- Electronic monitoring versus manual paper-based monitoring for hand hygiene compliance: a comprehensive health economic assessment analysis.BMC health services research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: An automated hand-hygiene monitoring system (AHHMS) was implemented in October 2019 at the Methodology: A full cost-effectiveness economic assessment was carried out for the hospital. The alternatives assessed were AHHMS implementation Results: The total estimated cost of the AHHMS alternative represented potential savings of $308,927-$546,795 US Dollars compared to non-implementation of the system (US$464,102 v. US$773,029-$1,010,898) for the period. AHHMS effectiveness was reflected in a diminished number of infections, 46-79 (-43.4-56.7%) compared to non-implementation (60 v. 106-139 infections). Conclusion: The AHHMS was found to be a cost-saving alternative for the HIMFG given its cost-effectiveness and lower cost
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.