ArticleGalen medical journal2024
A New Remote Monitoring System: Evaluation of the Efficiency and Accuracy of the Smart Emergency Medical System-Health Internet of Things Device.
Article in Galen medical journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Trustworthy AI in Telehealth: Navigating Challenges, Ethical Considerations, and Future Opportunities for Equitable Healthcare Delivery.Healthcare technology lettersReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe remote medical monitoring system can facilitate monitoring patients with cardiac arrhythmia, and consequently, reduce mortality and complications in individuals requiring emergency interventions. Hence, it is necessary to evaluate new telemedicine devices and compare them with standard devices. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate and compare the new remote monitoring system, Smart Emergency Medical System-Health Internet of Things (SEMS-HIOT) developed by the Health Technology Development Centre of Babol University of Medical Sciences on patients with different cardiac arrhythmias and compare it with the standard device. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this case-control study, 60 patients were divided into the six most common arrhythmia groups (n=10 per each group and equal gender) as atrial fibrillation, ventricular tachycardia, paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia, premature ventricular contractions, atrial tachycardia, and premature atrial contractions. Also, 20 healthy individuals (including 10 men and 10 women) without any arrhythmia (normal rhythm) were considered as the control group. Three similar SEMS-HIOT devices were used as test devices and a standard cardiac monitoring device as the control device. The clinical parameters, including heart rate, pulse rate, oxygen saturation, body temperature, and cardiac electrical activity via electrocardiogram (ECG) lead-II were recorded.
resultsFindings showed that the performance of the SEMS-HIOT test device was similar and in the same range for all indices in each group and there were no significant differences compared to the performance of the control device (P0.05). Also, the ECG records measured with SEMS-HIOT and standard device indicate no significant differences (P0.05).
conclusionOur study showed that the cardiac indices as well as ECG findings, which were measured with SEMS-HIOT and common standard devices confirmed the accuracy and reliability of the new telematics device for monitoring patients with cardiac diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.