A pragmatic methodology for the evaluation of digital care management in the context of multimorbidity

References

• Pearson-Stuttard J, Ezzati M, Gregg EW. Multimorbidity – a defining challenge for health systems. Lancet Public Heal. 2019;4(12):e599–e600.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iaccarino G, Grassi G, Borghi C, et al. Age and multimorbidity predict death among COVID-19 patients: results of the SARS-RAS study of the italian society of hypertension. Hypertension. 2020;76(2):366–372.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tinetti ME, Fried TR, Boyd CM. Designing health care for the most common chronic condition – multimorbidity. JAMA. 2012;307(23):2493–2494.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyd C, Smith CD, Masoudi FA, et al. Decision making for older adults with multiple chronic conditions: executive summary for the American Geriatrics Society guiding principles on the care of older adults with multimorbidity. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2019;67(4):665–673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattie H, et al. A framework for predicting impactability of digital care management using machine learning methods. Popul Heal Manag. 2019;23(4):319–325.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kastner M, Hayden L, Wong G, et al. Underlying mechanisms of complex interventions addressing the care of older adults with mulimorbidity: a realist review. BMJ Open. 2019;9(4):e025009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American College of Physicians. Chronic care management tool kit: what practices need to do to implement and bill CCM codes. 2015:1–8.
   Google Scholar
• “What is Digital Health?” U.S. Food and Drug Association. 2020. [cited 2021 Feb 6]. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/digital-health-center-excellence/what-digital-health.
   Google Scholar
• Kvedar JC, Fogel AL, Elenko E, et al. Digital medicine’s march on chronic disease. Nat Biotechnol. 2016;34(3):239–246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downing J, Bollyky J, Schneider J. Use of a connected glucose meter and certified diabetes educator coaching to decrease the likelihood of abnormal blood glucose excursions: the Livongo for diabetes program. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(7):e234.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bollyky J, Lu WEI, Schneider J, et al. Cost savings associated with usage and blood glucose control for members of the Livongo for diabetes program. Diabetes. 2018;67(Supplement 1):1330.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panch T, Goodman E. Technology, seniors, and sense making. Am J Manag Care. 2016;22(7):SP250–SP251.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mueller NE, Panch T, Macias C, et al. Using smartphone apps to promote psychiatric rehabilitation in a peer-led community support program: pilot study. JMIR Ment Health. 2018;5(3):e10092.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Domenge N. Driving patient engagement through mobile care management. Healthc Inf Manag Syst Soc Conf Session. 2017.
   Google Scholar
• van Velthoven MH, Smith C. Some considerations on digital health validation. Npj Digit Med. 2019;2(1):843–844.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Priebe JA, Toelle TR. Is there a right control condition in mHealth trials? A critical view on pain medicine. NPJ Digit Med. 2019;2:107.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Auerbach AD, Landefeld CS, Shojania KG. The tension between needing to improve care and knowing how to do it. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(6):608–613.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunbar-Rees R, Panch T, Dancy M. From volume to value? Can a value-based approach help deliver the ambitious aims of the NHS cardiovascular disease outcomes strategy? Heart. 2014;100(11):827–832.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter M, Lee T. The strategy that will fix health care. Harvard Business Review; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Obermeyer Z, Powers B, Vogeli C, et al. Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations. Science. 2019;366(6464):447–453.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castro Sweet CM, Chiguluri V, Gumpina R, et al. Outcomes of a digital health program with human coaching for diabetes risk reduction in a medicare population. J Aging Health. 2018;30(5):692–710.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abadie A. Difference-in-difference estimators. In Microeconometrics. London: Palgrave Macmillan; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Dorje T, Zhao G, Tso K, et al. Smartphone and social media-based cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention in China (SMART-CR/SP): a parallel-group, single-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Digit Heal. 2019;1(7):e363–e374.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wennberg DE, Marr A, Lang L, et al. A randomized trial of a telephone care-management strategy. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(13):1245–1255.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown R, Peikes D, Chen A, et al. 15-Site randomized trial of coordinated care in medicare FFS. Health Care Financ Rev. 2008;30(1):5–25.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Finkelstein A, Zhou A, Taubman S, et al. Health care hotspotting - a randomized, controlled trial. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(2):152–162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green SR, Singh V, O’Byrne W. Hope for New Jersey’s city hospitals: the Camden Initiative. Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2010;7:1d.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Powers B, et al. Impact of complex care management on spending and utilization for high-need, high-cost medicaid patients. Am J Manag Care. 2020;26:e57–e63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stuart E, Bradshaw C, Leaf P. Assessing the generalizability of randomized trial results to target populations. Prev Sci. 2015;16(3):475–485.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Susukida R, Crum R, Ebnesajjad C, et al. Generalizability of findings from randomized controlled trials: application to the national institute of drug abuse clinical trials network. Addiction. 2017;112(7):1210–1219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clay R. More than one way to measure. Monit Psychol. 2010;41:52–55.
   Google Scholar
• Glass TA, Goodman SN, Hernan MA, et al. Causal inference in public health. Annu Rev Public Health. 2013;34:61–75.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall JA, Summers KH, Obenchain RL. Cost and utilization comparisons among propensity score-matched insulin lispro and regular insulin users. JMCP. 2003;9(3):263–268.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stuart EA, DuGof E, Abrams M, et al. Estimating causal effects in observational studies using electronic health data: challenges and (some) solutions. eGEMs. 2013;1(3):4.
   Google Scholar
• Stuart EA. Matching methods for causal inference: a review and a look forward. Stat Sci. 2010;25(1):1–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seeger JD, Williams PL, Walker AM. An application of propensity score matching using claims data. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2005;14(7):465–476.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atun R. Health systems, systems thinking and innovation. Health Policy Plan. 2012;27:4–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ranganathan P, Pramesh C, Aggarwal R. Common pitfalls in statistical analysis: intention-to-treat versus per-protocol analysis. Perspect Clin Res. 2016;7(3):144.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Steiner PM, Cook TD, Shadish WR, et al. The importance of covariate selection in controlling for selection bias in observational studies. Psychol Methods. 2010;15(3):250–267.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roca J, Vargas C, Cano I, et al. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease heterogeneity: challenges for health risk assessment, stratification and management. J Transl Med. 2014;12(Suppl 2):S3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrido MM, Kelley AS, Paris J, et al. Methods for constructing and assessing propensity scores. Health Serv Res. 2014;49(5):1701–1720.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika. 1983;70(1):41–55.
   Google Scholar
• Altman NS. An introduction to kernel and nearest-neighbor nonparametric regression. Am. Stat. 1992;46(3):175–185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Austin PC. Optimal caliper widths for propensity-score matching when estimating differences in means and differences in proportions in observational studies. Pharm Stat. 2011;10(2):150–161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnett K, Mercer SW, Norbury M, et al. Epidemiology of multimorbidity and implications for health care, research, and medical education: a cross-sectional study. The Lancet. 2012;380(9836):37–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whaley CM, Bollyky JB, Lu W, et al. Reduced medical spending associated with increased use of a remote diabetes management program and lower mean blood glucose values. J Med Econ. 2019;22(9):869–877.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vuik SI, Mayer E, Darzi A. Enhancing risk stratification for use in integrated care: a cluster analysis of high-risk patients in a retrospective cohort study. BMJ Open. 2016;6(12):e012903.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneeweiss S, Rassen JA, Glynn RJ, et al. High-dimensional propensity score adjustment in studies of treatment effects using health care claims data. Epidemiology. 2009;20(4):512–522.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panch T, Mattie H, Celi LA. The “inconvenient truth” about AI in healthcare. NPJ Digit Med. 2019;2:77.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar