ArticleRevista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social2024
[Cost-effectiveness of digital care and face-to-face care in the first-level of care].
Article in Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The medical care paradigm is face-to-face; however, technological development has led to the digital modality. Objective: To determine cost-effectiveness of digital care and face-to-face care at the first level of care. Material and methods: Cost-effectiveness study. 2 groups were integrated: the digital service and the face-to-face service. The sample size was calculated with the percentage formula for 2 groups, and the result was 217 per group. The effectiveness was evaluated in 3 dimensions: the satisfaction of the patient, of the doctor and of the medical assistant. In all 3 cases the Visual analogue scale was used. The cost corresponded to the fixed unit cost estimated with the technique of times and movements adjusted for the duration of care. The statistical analysis included averages, percentages and cost-effectiveness ratio. Results: The cost of digital attention is $343.83 and face-to-face attention is $171.91 (all estimated in Mexican pesos). From the patient's perspective, the effectiveness in digital care is $9.47 and in face-to-face is $9.25. The cost to reach effectiveness of 10 in face-to-face care is $185.85 and in digital care $363.20. From the physician's perspective, the cost to achieve effectiveness of 10 is $419.13 in digital care and $184.52 in face-to-face care. From the perspective of the medical assistant, to achieve effectiveness of 10, the cost in digital care is $468.43 and in face-to-face $179.83. Conclusions: Currently, the best cost-effectiveness ratio corresponds to face-to-face care; however, digital care is an option that will have to evolve.
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.