The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Systematic review of studies of the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine and telecare. Changes in the economic evidence over twenty years
Abstract
A systematic review of studies of the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine and telecare was undertaken from 1990 until September 2010. Twelve databases were searched, using economic evaluation terms combined with telemedicine terms. The search identified 80 studies which were classed as full economic evaluations; the majority (38) were cost-consequence analyses. There were 15 cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) and seven cost-utility analyses (CUA). In the period January 2004 to September 2010 there were 47 studies. Eleven were CEA and seven were CUA. Economic tools are being increasingly used for telemedicine and telecare studies, although better reporting of the methodologies and findings of the economic evaluations is required. Nonetheless, the results of the review were consistent with previous findings, i.e. there is no further conclusive evidence that telemedicine and telecare interventions are cost-effective compared to conventional health care.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Evidence about cost-effectiveness remains limited, and there are no reliable data on the long-term benefits and economic implications of HT interventions [51].”
From Effects of Home Telemonitoring Interventions on Patients With Chronic Heart Failure: An Overview of Systematic Reviews (2015) · cites this paper as [51]
Citations
Cites
Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes
Drummond, M. E., Sculpher, M. J., Torrance, G. W., O’Brien, B. J., & Stoddart, G. L. (2005) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198529446.001.0001 · Cited by 13,648
Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ
Drummond, M. F., & Jefferson, T. O. (1996) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.313.7052.275 · Cited by 1,827
Evers, S., Goossens, M. E. J. B., de Vet, H. C. W., van Tulder, M. W., & Ament, A. J. H. A. (2005) · International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care · doi:10.1017/s0266462305050324 · Cited by 860
Wootton, R. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7312.557 · Cited by 715
Systematic review of cost effectiveness studies of telemedicine interventions
Whitten, P. S., Mair, F. S., Haycox, A., May, C. R., Williams, T. L., & Hellmich, S. (2002) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.324.7351.1434 · Cited by 526
Systematic review of evidence for the benefits of telemedicine
Hailey, D., Roine, R., & Ohinmaa, A. (2002) · Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare · doi:10.1258/1357633021937604 · Cited by 400
A systematic review of economic analyses of telehealth services using real time video communication
Wade, V. A., Karnon, J., Elshaug, A. G., & Hiller, J. E. (2010) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/1472-6963-10-233 · Cited by 351
Development and Validation of a Grading System for the Quality of Cost-Effectiveness Studies
Chiou, C., Hay, J. W., Wallace, J. F., Bloom, B. S., Neumann, P. J., Sullivan, S. D., Yu, H.-T., Keeler, E. B., Henning, J. M., & Ofman, J. J. (2003) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-200301000-00007 · Cited by 308
Whited, J. D., Datta, S., Aiello, L. M., Aiello, L. P., Cavallerano, J. D., Conlin, P. R., Horton, M. B., Vigersky, R. A., Poropatich, R. K., Challa, P., et al. (2005) · Telemedicine Journal and e-Health · doi:10.1089/tmj.2005.11.641 · Cited by 116
Can economic evaluation in telemedicine be trusted? A systematic review of the literature
Bergmo, T. S. (2009) · Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation · doi:10.1186/1478-7547-7-18 · Cited by 103
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to Methods of Technology Appraisal. London: NICE, 2008
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–215 of 215
Determining the Value of Telerheumatology
Concoff, A. L. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-00936-5_10
A Bibliometric Analysis of the Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare: 2007-2022
KURŞUN, A. (2023) · AJIT-e Academic Journal of Information Technology · doi:10.5824/ajite.2023.03.001.x
Alotaibi, A. M., Alharbi, A. F., Alwatban, N., Alghufaili, A., Alqasem, A., Alroqi, A., & Turki, Y. A. A. (2023) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.48368
Werner, G. D. A., van Riel, A., Gijsberts, M. I. L., & de Visser, M. (2024) · Research for policy · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-58564-7_6
Sharif, F., Rahman, A., Tonner, E., Ahmed, H., Haq, I., Abbass, R., Asinger, S., & Sbai, M. (2020) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.13240323
Cost analysis for telemedicine services: A scoping review of literature on the cost-benefit approach
Bene, L. D., & Menegon, C. (2026) · MANAGEMENT CONTROL · doi:10.3280/maco2025-003007
Gouverner la télémédecine. Analyse institutionnaliste d’une nouvelle pratique médicale
Rauly, A. (2016) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/4d78608ezc834z481bzba33z8b45004d1851
Évaluation et prise en charge des troubles émotionnels par le biais des nouvelles technologies
Gros, A. (2017) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/544539e8zaab1z42b8z9a16z472a0bbe143f
Raunbak, S. M., Christensen, J. J., Weinreich, U. M., Johnsen, S. P., & Udsen, F. W. (2026) · PharmacoEconomics - Open · doi:10.1007/s41669-026-00670-x
Foni, N. O., Malheiro, D. T., Parreira, K. C. J., Accorsi, T. A. D., Moreira, F. T., Kohler, K. F., Pedrotti, C. H. S., & Wolosker, N. (2026) · SICOT-J · doi:10.1051/sicotj/2026039
Expert Witness Testimony through Video Conferencing in India: Present Legal Status & Related Issues
Verma, S. K., Verma, A., & Nayyar, P. S. (2026) · Indian Internet Journal of Forensic Medicine & Toxicology · doi:10.48165/iijfmt.2026.24.01.03
Surgical telementoring platforms for clinical care and training: a systematic review
Peñaranda, N. R., Wisz, P., Vella, J., Bilancia, E. P., Carl, N., Beatrici, E., Barretta, A., Guidotti, A., Cei, F., Pasquini, P., et al. (2026) · Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies · doi:10.1080/13645706.2026.2734221
Lipych, L., Лютак, О., Kovalska, L., & Voitovych, S. (2026) · Scientific Notes of Lviv University of Business and Law · doi:10.66556/2663-0117.51.lipych-l
Metadata
- Authors
- Mistry, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Birmingham (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Mistry, Hema
- ORCID
- Mistry, Hema
- Venue
- Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-11-18
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-6
- ISSN
- 1357-633X (ISSN-L)
- 1758-1109
- OpenAlex
- W2071077750
- Cited by
- 215
- References
- 20
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 2.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Technology Use by Older Adults
- Keywords
- telemedicine, telecare, cost-effectiveness, economic evaluation, cost-consequence analysis, cost-utility analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, reporting quality, health technology assessment
- MeSH terms
- Cost-Benefit Analysis, Health Services Accessibility, Health Services Research, Humans, Time Factors, Health Care Costs, Patient Satisfaction, 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
