ArticleThe Permanente journal2026
Readmission Prevention: Evidence From a Remote Patient Monitoring Program.
Article in The Permanente journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionReadmissions are a major source of burden to patients, hospitals, and third-party payers. Remote patient monitoring (RPM) was initially implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic but was later expanded to other high-risk patients upon discharge from the hospital.
methodsThe authors used a retrospective data of convenience sample of adult patients enrolled in their RPM program from March 2024 to May 2025. Inclusion criteria included adult patients > 21 years of age, members of Geisinger Health Plan or Keystone Accountable Care Organization, high-priority diagnosis-related groups with elevated Epic readmission risk score, home internet availability, and discharge disposition to home. Exclusion criteria included patients' age < 21 years old, not members of Geisinger Health Plan or Keystone Accountable Care Organization, lack of home internet eligibility, and discharge disposition other than home. The primary outcome measure was 30-day all-cause readmissions. RESULTS & DISCUSSION: The analysis of patients enrolled in RPM and those who were followed afterward showed a significant reduction in 30-day readmissions, with 30% absolute reduction (11% in enrolled group vs 41% in non-enrolled group). Finally, through modeling, the authors opine on the potential effect of RPM on the national readmission landscape.
conclusionThe RPM program provided a significant benefit to 30-day readmission among the authors' convenience sample.
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.