SynthesisBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2026
Virtual healthcare compared to hospital care for acute and post-acute illness in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Virtual healthcare compared to hospital care for acute and post-acute illness in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, quality of life (QoL) and patient/caregiver satisfaction associated with VWs/HaH vs. traditional inpatient care in adults with acute or post-acute illness.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024508457). Major databases were searched until October 2024. Primary outcomes were mortality, readmission, emergency attendance and length of stay. Secondary outcomes were quality of life (QoL), cost-effectiveness, patient satisfaction and caregiver burden. Meta-analyses employed random-effects models; heterogeneity was assessed using the I
resultsA total of 47 reports of RCTs (9749 patients) were included. Meta-analyses showed no statistically significant differences in mortality over 1 to 12-month periods (OR 0.82-1.11, 95% CI 0.54-1.43), readmission rates (OR 0.93-1.16, 95% CI 0.80-1.67) or emergency attendance rates (3-month OR 0.86, 95% CI: 0.6-1.25). Narrative synthesis indicated VWs/HaH had higher patient satisfaction and potential cost savings. Quality of life outcomes were comparable, with some improvements in pain and emotional well-being noted in home care settings.
conclusionVWs/HaH models demonstrated non-inferior clinical safety and cost-effectiveness compared to inpatient care for select adult populations. High satisfaction and comparable clinical outcomes were observed. Findings support the continued, regulated integration of virtual care into routine practice. Future research should focus on service standardization, patient/caregiver satisfaction and support and specific economic evaluations.
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.