ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2010
Formative evaluation of a telemedicine model for delivering clinical neurophysiology services part II: the referring clinician and patient perspective.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- LoVE in a time of CoVID: Clinician and patient experience using telemedicine for chronic epilepsy management.Epilepsy & behavior : E&B · 2021Article
- Evaluation of Patient Experience During Virtual and In-Person Urgent Care Visits: Time and Cost Analysis.Journal of patient experience · 2021Article
- Future neurohospitalist: teleneurohospitalist.The Neurohospitalist · 2012Article
- Successes and challenges in the implementation and application of telemedicine in the eastern province of Saudi Arabia.Perspectives in health information managemen · 2012Article
- Formative evaluation of a telemedicine model for delivering clinical neurophysiology services part I: utility, technical performance and service provider perspective.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2010Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFeedback from service users will provide insight into opportunities for improvement so that performance can be optimised. In the context of a formative evaluation referring clinician and patient satisfaction with a teleneurophysiology service was examined during a 20 week pilot period.
methodsQuestionnaire surveys of referring clinicians and patients were conducted.
resultsFifteen (58%) clinicians responded to the first part of a postal survey which examined their satisfaction with traditional clinical neurophysiology services. Nine (35%) responded to a second part which assessed their experience with the teleneurophysiology service. Teleneurophysiology improved satisfaction with waiting times, availability of results and impact on patient management. There was unanimous support from the clinicians for the permanent development of a teleneurophysiology service, although 2 cautioned this could delay establishing a neurology service in their region.Eighty-two percent (116/142) of patients responded to a survey of their satisfaction with teleneurophysiology. This was compared to a previous report of 322 patients' experience with traditional CN services in Ireland. Waiting times for appointment were shorter for the former group who supported the telemedicine model recognising that it reduced the travel burden and need for overnight journeys. The two groups were equally anxious about the investigation although the teleneurophysiology patients received more prior information.
conclusionThis study illustrates that teleneurophysiology is an acceptable model of service delivery for its primary customers. Their feedback is important in informing appropriate design and governance of such innovative models of health service provision.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.