HOME TELEMONITORING FOR CHRONIC DISEASE MANAGEMENT: AN ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: There have been very few assessments of the economics of home telemonitoring, and the quality of evidence has often been weakened by methodological flaws. This has made it difficult to compare telehomecare with traditional home care for the chronic diseases studied. This economic analysis is an attempt to address this gap in the literature. METHODS: We have analyzed the consumption of healthcare services by 95 patients with various chronic diseases over a 21-month period, that is, 12 months before, 4 months during home telemonitoring use, and over 5 months after withdraw of the technology. RESULTS: Our findings indicate significant benefits to the home telemonitoring program as evidenced by large reductions in number of hospitalizations, length of average hospital stay, and, to a lesser extent, number of emergency room visits. Contrary to expectations, however, the number of home visits by nurses increased both during and after the telemonitoring intervention. In terms of the financial analysis, the telehomecare program resulted in significant savings: the equivalent of over CAD1,557 per patient as calculated on an annualized basis. This represents a net gain of 41 percent as compared to traditional home care. CONCLUSIONS: While the present economic analysis led to positive results, additional assessments should be conducted to confirm the cost-effectiveness of this mode of care delivery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".