The aim of this study is clear, in that those conducting the study are wanting to examine whether or not telehealth is cost effective in addition to the standard care compared to the standard care a patient would receive. It is clear with the results listed what the study found out. The title of the article is aligned with the study and the results. The references used are relevant to this study and are cited correctly. The study lists what is already known about this topic and also discusses what this study adds to the information already known. The research question is not clearly stated in the introduction portion of this paper; therefore, it is unable to determine if the research question is actually justified. The process of subjection selection is clear, the paper states they had 3230 patients eligible for the trail and of those patients 845 were randomly chose to participate using telehealth and 728 were randomly chosen to be treated using standard care. The variables were also clearly listed and measured appropriately, if the study was to be duplicated there is enough information given here do to that. The result data was displayed in an appropriate way, also using charts and tables to display outcomes. There were initial errors in the original tables however there is a section in this study where the author acknowledges the errors and has submitted correct charts. The results section summarizes the findings and explains how many participants completed the study and how many left the study early. It gives the statistically significant differences; however, I do not see the practically meaningful results. The conclusion answers the study objective or the aim of the study. This study’s results are compared to other similar studies. The strengths and limitations of this study are also discussed. The limitations are not fatal however they are mainly due to the study participants needing to self-report their information.

The study done was appropriate to answer the aim or objective. This study adds the price comparison to other study’s using telehealth. It gives an idea of the cost incurred by those with long-term illnesses utilizing telehealth options. This article is consistent, and the only flaws noted were corrected by the author acknowledging the incorrect information and adding the correct charts. This was a very informative article and helps others realize there is more to telehealth than speaking with the provider. If the patient is not actually going into the office to be seen they must still monitor their issues and it is up to the patient to self-report these results. Even if the device used is integrated and sends results the physician the patient must still be disciplined and check things such as their blood pressure or blood sugar as directed.

Things that could make this article better would be to clearly state the research question so that the reader knows exactly what is being answered by this study. I did like that there were many charts given to show the results obtained by this study.