ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2025
Avatar-based versus conventional patient monitoring with distant vision: a computer-based simulation study.
Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using a Wearable-Based Animated Patient Avatar to Improve Patients' Perception of Vital Signs: Multicenter Computer-Based Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Trial
- Observational
- Advances in Remote Monitoring Technology Applications in Anesthesia: A Narrative Review.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Review
- Anaesthesia professionals' perspectives on ECG interpretation and arrhythmia situation awareness with Visual Patient Heart: a qualitative multicentre study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient monitoring in the perioperative setting can be challenging, especially when monitoring multiple patients simultaneously or managing dynamic situations that require movement around the operating room. We aimed to evaluate whether avatar-based patient monitoring, which presents vital signs in the form of changing colors, shapes and motion, improves remote vital sign recognition compared to conventional monitoring. We conducted a prospective, single-center, computer-based simulation study to evaluate how anesthesia providers recognize vital signs when using the Philips Visual Patient Avatar at different viewing distances (8 and 16 m) compared to conventional monitoring. The primary outcome was the total number of correctly identified vital signs which were compared for the two distances and the two devices using mixed Poisson regression. We analyzed data from 28 anesthesia providers who participated in 112 simulations. The correct recognition rate using the Visual Patient Avatar compared to conventional monitoring at 8 m was increased by 74% (rate ratio 1.74, 95% CI, 1.42 to 2.14, p < 0.001) and by 51% at 16-meter viewing distance (rate ratio 1.51, 95% CI, 1.23 to 1.87, p < 0.001). We observed scenario-specific superior performance for six vital signs at 8 m. The results provide empirical evidence that avatar-based monitoring can significantly improve the perception of vital signs when using distant vision.
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.