Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15615285›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical systems2004

Assessment of patients' acceptance of and satisfaction with teledermatology.

George Demiris, Stuart M Speedie, Lanis L Hicks

Abstract readSystematic ReviewValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical systems, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Development of the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ).International journal of telerehabilitation · 2016
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Asynchronous telehealth: a scoping review of analytic studies.Open medicine : a peer-reviewed, independent, open-access journal · 2009
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

George DemirisHealth Management and Informatics, School of Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA. demirisg@health.missouri.edu
Stuart M Speedie
Lanis L Hicks

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Teledermatology refers to the use of information and communication technologies (such as videoconferencing or transmission of digital images) to enable the practice of diagnostic dermatology between participants separated by geographic distance. The objective of this study was to critically review the quality of evidence about patient satisfaction with teledermatology applications. Sample size, reporting of validity and reliability, used instrument and its underlying constructs were determined for all studies where information was available. Fourteen studies were identified, five refer to store-and-forward applications, the remaining ones describe video-based systems. The systematic review demonstrated that methodological deficiencies in the published research impact the generalizability of findings. The two types of teledermatology (video-based and store-and-forward) require different satisfaction instruments as they are based on different contexts of care delivery, with video-mediated communication being key in the former and patients' absence from the diagnostic process in the latter mode of care delivery.

Indexed as

Patient Acceptance of Health CarePatient SatisfactionDermatologyFocus GroupsHumansMedical Informatics ApplicationsPhysician-Patient RelationsRemote ConsultationTelemedicineVideoconferencing

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.