Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37750813›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2023

Economic evaluation of remote patient monitoring and organizational analysis according to patient involvement: a scoping review.

Myriam Le Goff-Pronost, Isabelle Bongiovanni-Delarozière

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of technology assessment in health care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

2 authors.

Myriam Le Goff-PronostIMT Atlantique LATIM (UMR INSERM 1101), M@rsouin, Brest, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5425-4474
Isabelle Bongiovanni-DelarozièreHAS, Haute Autorité de Santé, Saint-Denis La Plaine Cedex, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA literature review concerning the economic evaluation of telemonitoring was requested by the authority in charge of health evaluation in France, in a context of deployment of remote patient monitoring and identification of its financing. Due to the heterogeneity of existing telemonitoring solutions, it was necessary to stratify the evaluation according to patient involvement. Three levels of patient involvement are considered: weak (automated monitoring), medium (monitoring supported by a professional), and strong (active remote participation).

objectivesWe performed a scoping review to provide a comprehensive overview of different systems of telemonitoring and their reported cost-effectiveness.

methodsFollowing PRISMA-ScR guidelines, a search was performed in four databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library between January 1, 2013 and May 19, 2020. Remote patient monitoring should include the combination of three elements: a connected device, an organizational solution for data analysis and alert management, and a system allowing personalized interactions, and three degrees of involvement.

resultsWe identified 61 eligible studies among the 489 records identified. Heart failure remains the pathology most represented in the studies selected (

conclusionsRemote patient monitoring is reported to be cost-effective whatever the system and patient involvement.

Indexed as

Group ProcessesPatient ParticipationCost-Benefit AnalysisFranceHumansMonitoring, Physiologiccost-effectivenesspatient involvementremote patient monitoringscoping reviewtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID37750813
PMCPMC11570193

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.