ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2011
Institutionalizing telemedicine applications: the challenge of legitimizing decision-making.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Rewiring care delivery through Digital Therapeutics (DTx): a machine learning-enhanced assessment and development (M-LEAD) framework.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of the Technology Acceptance Model in Health Informatics.Applied clinical informatics · 2018Pooled it
- Cost-utility analysis of the EVOLVO study on remote monitoring for heart failure patients with implantable defibrillators: randomized controlled trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2013Trial
- Applications of Telemedicine in the Middle East and North Africa Region: Benefits Gained and Challenges Faced.Cureus · 2022Review
- The outlook of doctors toward telemedicine: A cross-sectional study of knowledge, awareness, and attitude in central India.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2021Article
- HTA and HIV: The Case of Dual NRTI Backbones in the Italian Setting.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Fighting the COVID-19 pandemic using the technology-based second-line in Italy and Lombardy: The urgent need of home-based remote monitoring systems to avoid the collapse of the hospital-centred first line.Journal of global health · 2020Review
- NIATx-TI versus typical product training on e-health technology implementation: a clustered randomized controlled trial study protocol.Implementation science : IS · 2020Article
- Evaluating Safety and Efficacy of Follow-up for Patients With Abdominal Pain Using Video Consultation (SAVED Study): Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Delivering telemedicine interventions in chronic respiratory disease.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2014Article
- Tele-education in South Africa.Frontiers in public health · 2014Article
- Adoption of routine telemedicine in Norway: the current picture.Global health action · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During the last decades a variety of telemedicine applications have been trialed worldwide. However, telemedicine is still an example of major potential benefits that have not been fully attained. Health care regulators are still debating why institutionalizing telemedicine applications on a large scale has been so difficult and why health care professionals are often averse or indifferent to telemedicine applications, thus preventing them from becoming part of everyday clinical routines. We believe that the lack of consolidated procedures for supporting decision making by health care regulators is a major weakness. We aim to further the current debate on how to legitimize decision making about the institutionalization of telemedicine applications on a large scale. We discuss (1) three main requirements--rationality, fairness, and efficiency--that should underpin decision making so that the relevant stakeholders perceive them as being legitimate, and (2) the domains and criteria for comparing and assessing telemedicine applications--benefits and sustainability. According to these requirements and criteria, we illustrate a possible reference process for legitimate decision making about which telemedicine applications to implement on a large scale. This process adopts the health care regulators' perspective and is made up of 2 subsequent stages, in which a preliminary proposal and then a full proposal are reviewed.
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.