ArticleHealth affairs scholar2025
Trends in utilization of remote monitoring in the United States.
Article in Health affairs scholar, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health Literacy and Capecitabine Adherence in a Remote Monitoring Pilot Trial for Breast Cancer: Post Hoc Exploratory Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2026Observational
- AI-Enabled Wearables for Motor Function Assessment and Rehabilitation in Parkinson Disease: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Review
- Care management services at safety-net clinics in the United States.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
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
Remote monitoring can help clinicians provide timely services and enable patients to engage in managing their medical conditions. Unfortunately, little is known about the national utilization of remote monitoring across the United States. Using 2019-2023 Medicare data encompassing 100% of professional services billed to and reimbursed by Medicare, we conducted a national analysis of remote-monitoring utilization. A total of 13 529 594 remote-monitoring services (remote patient monitoring and remote therapeutic monitoring), corresponding to $664 518 754, occurred between 2019 and 2023. Remote patient monitoring was most frequently delivered by primary care clinicians, accounting for 6 377 468 (48%) of all services, whereas remote therapeutic monitoring was most frequently delivered by other specialists, accounting for 173 621 (51%) services. With respect to place of service, most remote patient monitoring occurred in physician offices (12 135 569; 92%) compared with at home (540 219; 4%), or other care sites (515 302; 4%). Most remote therapeutic monitoring occurred in physician offices (322 156; 95%) compared with at home (12 560; 4%), or other care sites (3788; 1%). Our study results highlight the salient use of remote monitoring across clinical specialties and the need to address adoption barriers in certain care sites to further enhance utilization.
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.