MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036185179 · doi:10.2196/19514

Monitoring and Management of Home-Quarantined Patients With COVID-19 Using a WeChat-Based Telemedicine System: Retrospective Cohort Study

2020· article· en· W3036185179 on OpenAlexaff
Hui Xu, Sufang Huang, Chun Qiu, Shangkun Liu, Juan Deng, Xi Tan, Ling Ai, Yaru Xiao, Mirko Belliato, Yan Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Internet Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersHuazhong University of Science and Technology
KeywordsTelemedicineRetrospective cohort studyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineTelehealthCohortSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakMedical emergencyPandemicHealth careVirologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Most patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) who show mild symptoms are sent home by physicians to recover. However, the condition of some of these patients becomes severe or critical as the disease progresses. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate a telemedicine model that was developed to address the challenges of treating patients with progressive COVID-19 who are home-quarantined and shortages in the medical workforce. METHODS: A telemedicine system was developed to continuously monitor the progression of home-quarantined patients with COVID-19. The system was built based on a popular social media smartphone app called WeChat; the app was used to establish two-way communication between a multidisciplinary team consisting of 7 medical workers and 188 home-quarantined individuals (including 74 confirmed patients with COVID-19). The system helped patients self-assess their conditions and update the multidisciplinary team through a telemedicine form stored on a cloud service, based on which the multidisciplinary team made treatment decisions. We evaluated this telemedicine system via a single-center retrospective study conducted at Tongji Hospital in Wuhan, China, in January 2020. RESULTS: Among 188 individuals using the telemedicine system, 114 (60.6%) were not infected with COVID-19 and were dismissed. Of the 74 confirmed patients with COVID-19, 26 (35%) recovered during the study period and voluntarily stopped using the system. The remaining 48/76 confirmed patients with COVID-19 (63%) used the system until the end of the study, including 6 patients whose conditions progressed to severe or critical. These 6 patients were admitted to hospital and were stabilized (one received extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support for 17 days). All 74 patients with COVID-19 eventually recovered. Through a comparison of the monitored symptoms between hospitalized and nonhospitalized patients, we found prolonged persistence and deterioration of fever, dyspnea, lack of strength, and muscle soreness to be diagnostic of need for hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: By continuously monitoring the changes in several key symptoms, the telemedicine system reduces the risks of delayed hospitalization due to disease progression for patients with COVID-19 quarantined at home. The system uses a set of scales for quarantine management assessment that enables patients to self-assess their conditions. The results are useful for medical staff to identify disease progression and, hence, make appropriate and timely treatment decisions. The system requires few staff to manage a large cohort of patients. In addition, the system can solicit help from recovered but self-quarantined medical workers to alleviate shortages in the medical workforce and free healthy medical workers to fight COVID-19 on the front line. Thus, it optimizes the usage of local medical resources and prevents cross-infections among medical workers and patients.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.358 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations142
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Internet ResearchSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207