↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of telehealthcare for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
224 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of telehealthcare for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, May 2014
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-15-178
Pubmed ID
Authors

Flemming Witt Udsen, Pernille Heyckendorff Lilholt, Ole Hejlesen, Lars Holger Ehlers

Abstract

Several feasibility studies show promising results of telehealthcare on health outcomes and health-related quality of life for patients suffering from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and some of these studies show that telehealthcare may even lower healthcare costs. However, the only large-scale trial we have so far - the Whole System Demonstrator Project in England - has raised doubts about these results since it conclude that telehealthcare as a supplement to usual care is not likely to be cost-effective compared with usual care alone.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 224 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 220 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 45 20%
Researcher 31 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 13%
Student > Bachelor 19 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 35 16%
Unknown 54 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 60 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 13%
Psychology 11 5%
Engineering 11 5%
Social Sciences 8 4%
Other 44 20%
Unknown 61 27%