Telemedicine via Continuous Remote Care: A Proactive, Patient-Centered Approach to Improve Clinical Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has revolutionized health care for patients and providers alike. Telemedicine has moved from the periphery of our health care system to center stage more rapidly than anyone could have envisioned. Currently, virtual care has quite effectively replicated the traditional health system's care delivery model and reimbursement structure-a patient makes an appointment, then sees a physician (except with video or phone replacing in-office visits) who makes a care plan, and the patient and physician meet again at a later timepoint to assess progress. Replicating this episodic care paradigm virtually has been invaluable for delivering care swiftly during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, we can and should do more with the connectedness and convenience that telemedicine technology enables. Continuous remote care, with a data-driven, proactive outreach to patients, represents a decisive step forward in contrast to the currently available episodic, reactive, patient-initiated care. In the context of continuous remote care, patient biometric and symptom data (patient entered and connected data) are assimilated in real time by artificial intelligence-enabled clinical platforms to bring physicians' and other health care team members' attention to those patients who need intervention, whether this is via medication adjustments, acute care management, or lifestyle coaching. In this paper, we discuss how an innovative continuous remote care approach has improved outcomes in another deadly pandemic-type 2 diabetes mellitus.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".