ISBN: Outcomes No of Participants (studies) Follow up Quality of the evidence (GRADE) Relative effect Anticipated absolute effects Risk with Usual care Risk difference with telemonitoring (95% CI) =83%, unexplained by subgroup analysis for age, year of publication and intensity of intervention =55%, unexplained by subgroup analysis for age 6 Unable to calculate as studies reported MD and were analysed using the generic inverse variance method. Table 95: Clinical evidence summary: Telemonitoring + structured telephone support versus usual care Outcomes No of Participants (studies) Follow up Quality of the evidence (GRADE) Relative effect Anticipated absolute effects Risk with Usual care Risk difference with structured telephone support and telemonitoring (95% CI) Recent admission All-cause mortality 1437 due to risk of bias, imprecision (from 22 fewer to 88 fewer) All-cause hospitalisation 1437 due to risk of bias (from 34 fewer to 74 more) Quality of life (MLHWFQ) Better indicated by lower due to risk of bias, imprecision The mean QoL in the intervention groups was 1 Downgraded by 1 increment if the majority of the evidence was at high risk of bias, and downgraded by 2 increments if the majority of the evidence was at very high risk of bias Monitoring Chronic Heart Failure NICE 2018. All rights reserved. Subject to Notice of rights. ISBN: Outcomes No of Participants (studies) Follow up Quality of the evidence (GRADE) Relative effect Anticipated absolute effects Risk with Usual care Risk difference with structured telephone support and telemonitoring (95% CI) 2 Downgraded by 1 increment if the confidence interval crossed one MID or by 2 increments if the confidence interval crossed both MIDs 3 Unable to calculate as studies reported MD and were analysed using the generic inverse variance method Chronic Heart Failure Monitoring NICE 2018. All rights reserved. Subject to Notice of rights. 