ArticleBMJ open2025
Telemedicine-supported hospital-at-home for acutely admitted patients at Nordsjaellands Hospital, Denmark: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05920304 (Early Discharge - a Randomised Controlled Trial Evaluating Mental and Physical Effects on Acutely and Chronically Ill Patients in a Telemedicine Supported Virtual Hospital at Home Model), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Early Discharge - a Randomised Controlled Trial Evaluating Mental and Physical Effects on Acutely and Chronically Ill Patients in a Telemedicine Supported Virtual Hospital at Home Model
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hybrid Hospital at Home and Physical Activity for Adults Admitted to the Hospital With Acute Illness: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
- By the book or beyond? Lessons on implementation fidelity in remote patient monitoring within a hybrid hospital-at-home feasibility study.BMJ health & care informatics · 2026Trial
- Caring beyond hospital walls: Informal caregivers' experiences in a virtual and in-person hybrid hospital-at-home.BMC health services research · 2026Article
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
introductionThe combination of a reduction in the Danish hospital bed count, the shortage of hospital staff and demographic changes challenges the Danish hospital capacity. This was further highlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic when hospitals worldwide were overwhelmed by infected patients requiring acute hospital care. To address these challenges, a hospital-at-home (HaH) programme offers an alternative to conventional in-hospital admission. Furthermore, HaH has the potential to improve patient outcomes, reduce costs and increase patient satisfaction. However, few studies have evaluated HaH in a Scandinavian setting, and this article describes the protocol for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing an HaH model with continued conventional in-hospital admission. The main aim of the trial is to evaluate physical activity level and mental wellbeing in patients admitted at home compared with conventionally admitted patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 110 clinically stable patients from two internal medical wards at Nordsjaellands Hospital in Denmark will be included and randomised in a ratio of 1:1 to either continued conventional in-hospital admission (control group) or virtual HaH model (intervention group). The control group will receive standard hospital treatment, and the intervention group will be transferred home for continued treatment (eg, intravenous antibiotics or oxygen treatment). The primary outcome measures are physical activity assessed using daily step count (during the first 24 hours after inclusion, as an intermediary indicator of the risk of adverse events) and treatment satisfaction (assessed using a patient satisfaction survey). Secondary outcome measures are adverse events of special interest, escalation of care, readmission rate postdischarge (30 days and 90 days), mortality (associated and 7 days, 30 days and 90 days postdischarge), process data (eg, the number of teleconsultations) and a health economic evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Danish Research Ethics Committees (no. 2303051) and the Danish Medicines Agency (CIV-23-03-042542) and will be monitored by the Copenhagen University Hospital Good Clinical Practice unit. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant national and international conferences. We also plan to communicate the results to relevant stakeholders in the Danish healthcare system. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05920304.
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.