Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35337644›Full record

SynthesisThe Lancet. Digital health2022

Effectiveness and safety of pulse oximetry in remote patient monitoring of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review.

Ahmed Alboksmaty, Thomas Beaney, Sarah Elkin, Jonathan M Clarke, Ara Darzi, Paul Aylin, Ana-Luísa Neves

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Lancet. Digital health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

60 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 109 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Differentiating the start of an exacerbation from day-to-day variation in people with COPD: a systematic review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Patients' and GPs' views and expectations of home monitoring with a pulse oximeter: a mixed-methods process evaluation of a pilot randomised controlled trial.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Trial
  9. Home monitoring by pulse oximetry of primary care patients with COVID-19: a pilot randomised controlled trial.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Diagnostic accuracy of an over-the-counter infant pulse oximeter for cardiorespiratory events.Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition · 2025
    Observational
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ahmed AlboksmatyNIHR Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK. Electronic address: ama1716@ic.ac.uk.
Thomas BeaneyNIHR Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Sarah ElkinAirway Disease Infection Section, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College and Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Jonathan M ClarkeInstitute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK; EPSRC Centre for Mathematics of Precision Healthcare, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Ara DarziInstitute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK; Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Paul AylinNIHR Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Ana-Luísa NevesNIHR Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Imperial College London · GBNIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre · GBEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council · GBImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has led health systems to increase the use of tools for monitoring and triaging patients remotely. In this systematic review, we aim to assess the effectiveness and safety of pulse oximetry in remote patient monitoring (RPM) of patients at home with COVID-19. We searched five databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, medRxiv, and bioRxiv) from database inception to April 15, 2021, and included feasibility studies, clinical trials, and observational studies, including preprints. We found 561 studies, of which 13 were included in our narrative synthesis. These 13 studies were all observational cohorts and involved a total of 2908 participants. A meta-analysis was not feasible owing to the heterogeneity of the outcomes reported in the included studies. Our systematic review substantiates the safety and potential of pulse oximetry for monitoring patients at home with COVID-19, identifying the risk of deterioration and the need for advanced care. The use of pulse oximetry can potentially save hospital resources for patients who might benefit the most from care escalation; however, we could not identify explicit evidence for the effect of RPM with pulse oximetry on health outcomes compared with other monitoring models such as virtual wards, regular monitoring consultations, and online or paper diaries to monitor changes in symptoms and vital signs. Based on our findings, we make 11 recommendations across the three Donabedian model domains and highlight three specific measurements for setting up an RPM system with pulse oximetry.

Indexed as

COVID-19HumansMonitoring, PhysiologicOximetryPandemics

Identifiers

PMID35337644
PMCPMC8940208
OpenAlexW4220964381

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.