ArticleInternational journal of medical informatics2025
Regression discontinuity in Time: Evaluating the impact of evolving digital health interventions.
Article in International journal of medical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chest CT-detected pulmonary nodules across the COVID-19 pandemic in Guangzhou, China: a regression discontinuity-in-time study, 2013-2023.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- A Quantitative Framework for Evaluating the Performance of Algorithm-Directed Whole-Population Remote Patient Monitoring: Tutorial for Type 1 Diabetes Care.JMIR diabetes · 2026Article
- Telehealth to reduce compound pressures on the National Health Service and social care: a multi-methods study protocol.Oxford open digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinics continue to adopt digital health interventions (DHIs) in which algorithms analyze data to help direct patient care. Changes to these algorithms are rarely evaluated rigorously, despite their potential to affect patient outcomes. The regression discontinuity in time (RDT) design may be used to estimate the causal effect of such changes but has received little attention in medical literature.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective study of continuous glucose monitor (CGM) data from youth with type 1 diabetes enrolled in the 4T Program from November 2020 to March 2022. In 2020, the clinic used an algorithm that directed patients for provider review based on the number of glucose targets not being met (e.g., time in range (TIR) < 65 %). In September 2021, the clinic adopted a new algorithm that prioritized the review of patients experiencing level 2 hypoglycemia (glucose < 54 mg/dl). We evaluated the validity of the RDT framework in this setting and estimated the impact of this change in directed care on weekly TIR.
resultsThere were 247 patients with 11,297 weekly TIR observations. Robustness checks supported the validity of the RDT design. Patients with level 2 hypoglycemia were prioritized for review, with no significant change to population-level TIR (-0.2% points; 95% CI:[-4.8, 3.5]).
conclusionsWe demonstrate the feasibility of using the RDT framework to estimate the impact of algorithmic changes to a DHI on patient care. As algorithm-directed care increases in clinical practice, this approach can serve as a diagnostic tool to measure how operational changes impact outcomes.
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.