Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24982492›Full record

Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2014

Experiences of front-line health professionals in the delivery of telehealth: a qualitative study.

Virginia MacNeill, Caroline Sanders, Ray Fitzpatrick, Jane Hendy, James Barlow, Martin Knapp, Anne Rogers, Martin Bardsley, Stanton P Newman

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
9.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

58 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 109 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. TelehealthPsychological medicine · 2022
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Work-From-Home in the New Normal: A Phenomenological Inquiry into Employees' Mental Health.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Virginia MacNeillDepartment of Social and Environmental Health Research, Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London.
Caroline SandersCentre for Primary Care, Institute of Population Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester.
Ray FitzpatrickDepartment of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford.
Jane HendyFaculty of Business, Economics and Law, Department of Health Care Management and Policy, University of Surrey, Guildford.
James BarlowImperial College Business School, London.
Martin KnappLondon School of Economics and Political Science, London.
Anne RogersFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton.
Martin BardsleyNuffield Trust, London.
Stanton P NewmanCity University, London.
City, University of London · GBImperial College London · GBLondon School of Economics and Political Science · GBNuffield Trust · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTelehealth is an emerging field of clinical practice but current UK health policy has not taken account of the perceptions of front-line healthcare professionals expected to implement it.

aimTo investigate telehealth care for people with long-term conditions from the perspective of the front-line health professional. DESIGN AND

settingA qualitative study in three sites within the UK (Kent, Cornwall, and the London Borough of Newham) and embedded in the Whole Systems Demonstrator evaluation, a large cluster randomised controlled trial of telehealth and telecare for patients with long-term and complex conditions.

methodSemi-structured qualitative interviews with 32 front-line health professionals (13 community matrons, 10 telehealth monitoring nurses and 9 GPs) involved in the delivery of telehealth. Data were analysed using a modified grounded theory approach.

resultsMixed views were expressed by front-line professionals, which seem to reflect their levels of engagement. It was broadly welcomed by nursing staff as long as it supplemented rather than substituted their role in traditional patient care. GPs held mixed views; some gave a cautious welcome but most saw telehealth as increasing their work burden and potentially undermining their professional autonomy.

conclusionHealth care professionals will need to develop a shared understanding of patient self-management through telehealth. This may require a renegotiation of their roles and responsibilities.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelTelemedicineClinical CompetenceCluster AnalysisCost of IllnessDelivery of Health CareFamily PracticeHumansLong-Term CareNursing CarePatient ParticipationProfessional-Patient Relationsprimary carequalitativetelehealthWhole System Demonstrator

Identifiers

PMID24982492
PMCPMC4073725
OpenAlexW2118303366

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.