Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42348131›Full record

Observational studyJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2026

Data availability and usability of a remote device for vital sign monitoring on general wards and home: a single-center prospective, observational study.

A Jonkers, M de Groot, M Duijvestein, P R de Reuver, G Huisman-de Waal, S J H Bredie, I M Spenkelink

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

A Jonkers *Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. anton.jonkers@radboudumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-6886-8520
M de GrootHealth Innovation Labs, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
M DuijvesteinDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, 6525, GA, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4814-9376
P R de ReuverDepartment of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8566-4222
G Huisman-de WaalHealth Innovation Labs, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2811-4176
S J H BredieHealth Innovation Labs, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
I M SpenkelinkHealth Innovation Labs, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3772-2851

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Continuous monitoring with wireless wearable devices enables early detection of clinical deterioration and supports post-discharge monitoring. This study evaluated data availability and patient usability of a novel upper-arm wearable sensor for continuous monitoring, on the general ward and at home, and compared its intramural performance with the current local standard. This prospective observational study was conducted at an academic hospital involving surgical and gastroenterological patients. The viQtor was used alongside ViSi Mobile during hospital admission and subsequently stand-alone for seven days post-discharge. Data availability was measured by analyzing the proportion of missing data, usability with the System Usability Scale (SUS), and data agreement by comparing in-hospital vital sign measurements between the viQtor and ViSi Mobile. Forty-five patients (median age 64 years) participated, of whom 35 (78%) continued using viQtor at home. Data gaps increased with patient activity during admission and at home. In-hospital data availability for the viQtor was similar for pulse rate (87% vs. 85%) but lower for respiratory rate (56% vs. 83%) and oxygen saturation (SpO₂) (48% vs. 84%) compared to ViSi Mobile. At home, the data availability of the viQtor for pulse rate, respiratory rate and SpO

Indexed as

Vital SignsWearable Electronic DevicesAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDigital HealthFemaleHeart RateHumansMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, PhysiologicOxygen SaturationPatients' RoomsProspective StudiesRemote Patient MonitoringContinuous monitoringDeviceGeneral wardHospitalviQtorViSi Mobile

Identifiers

PMID42348131
PMCPMC13562157

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.