Cited by 179Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationDiabetes Management and EducationDiabetes Management and Research

Home telemonitoring of patients with diabetes: a systematic assessment of observed effects

Jaana, Mirou, Paré, Guy·2007·Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

Abstract

Rationale, aims and objectives Diabetes represents a common chronic disease continuously growing worldwide. Unless closely monitored, it can be associated with serious complications and high expenditures. Telemonitoring is a patient management approach increasingly used with chronic illnesses. It supports timely transmission and remote interpretation of patients’ data for follow‐up and preventive interventions. No comprehensive review exists on all aspects of diabetes ‘home telemonitoring’ and its effects. The objective of this study is to provide a systematic review of this approach and its effect at the informational, clinical, behavioural, structural and economical levels. Methods A comprehensive literature review was conducted on Medline and Cochrane Library to identify relevant articles. The keywords used include diabetes, telemonitoring, home monitoring, telecare and telemedicine. Results Seventeen studies using diverse technologies and transmitting different clinical, medical and behavioural data were found. Significant impacts were observed namely at the behavioural, clinical and structural levels. Minimal technical problems and no cost‐benefit and cost‐effectiveness analyses were reported. Conclusion Close management of diabetic patients through telemonitoring showed significant reduction in HbA 1c and complications, good receptiveness by patients and patient empowerment and education. Yet, the magnitude of its effects remains debatable, especially with the variation in patients’ characteristics (e.g. background, ability for self‐management, medical condition), samples selection and approach for treatment of control groups. Further investigation of telemonitoring efficacy and cost‐effectiveness over longer periods of time, and larger samples is needed. Assessment of the attitude of providers is also important in light of their heavy workload and issues of reimbursement.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00686.x

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 26 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jaana, M., & Paré, G.
Corresponding author
Jaana, Mirou
Venue
Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-12-12
Volume
13
Issue
2
Pages
242-253
ISSN
  • 1356-1294 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2753
OpenAlex
W2002822753
Cited by
178
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 10
FWCI
1.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
Keywords
diabetes mellitus, home health monitoring, telemedicine, glycemic control, HbA1c, diabetes complications, patient empowerment, patient education, cost-effectiveness, telecare, self-management
MeSH terms
Diabetes Mellitus, Home Care Services, Humans, Monitoring, Physiologic, Taiwan, Telemedicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review