Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26636057›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2015

User Feedback on the MSF Tele-Expertise Service After a 4-Year Pilot Trial - A Comprehensive Analysis.

Laurent Bonnardot, Elizabeth Wootton, Joanne Liu, Olivier Steichen, Jean-Hervé Bradol, Christian Hervé, Richard Wootton

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Cost-Effectiveness of Telemedicine in Asia: A Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2021
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Laurent BonnardotFondation Médecins Sans Frontières , Paris , France ; EA4569, Department of Medical Ethics and Legal Medicine, Paris Descartes University , Paris , France.
Elizabeth WoottonUniversity of Edinburgh , Edinburgh , UK.
Joanne LiuMédecins Sans Frontières , Geneva , Switzerland ; McGill University , Montréal, QC , Canada.
Olivier SteichenInternal Medicine Department, Tenon Hospital, AP-HP , Paris , France ; Faculty of Medicine, Sorbonne Universités, University Pierre et Marie Curie , Paris , France ; U1142, Laboratoire d'Informatique Médicale et d'Ingénieurie des Connaissances en e-Santé (LIMICS), INSERM, Université Paris , Paris , France.
Jean-Hervé BradolCrash, Fondation Médecins Sans Frontières , Paris , France.
Christian HervéEA4569, Department of Medical Ethics and Legal Medicine, Paris Descartes University , Paris , France.
Richard WoottonNorwegian Centre for Integrated Care and Telemedicine, University Hospital of North Norway , Tromsø , Norway ; Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Tromsø , Tromsø , Norway.
Médecins Sans Frontières · FRMédecins Sans Frontières‎ · GBSorbonne Université · FRUniversity of Edinburgh · GBUniversity of South-Eastern Norway · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We surveyed all users of the Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) tele-expertise service, approximately four years after it began operation. The survey contained 50 questions and was sent to 294 referrers and 254 specialists. There were 163 responses (response rate 30%). There were no significant differences between the responses from French and English users, so the responses were combined for subsequent analysis. Most of the responders were doctors (133 of 157 who answered that question), and most had completed field missions for MSF, i.e., both specialists and referrers. The majority stated that the system was user friendly and that they found it self-explanatory (i.e., they did not need to be shown how to use it). Almost all the referrers found that the telemedicine advice that they received was helpful, changed diagnosis and management, and/or reassured the patient. Similar feedback came from the specialists, who also felt that there was educational value for the field doctor. Although there was general satisfaction with the service, the survey identified various problems. The main concerns of the referrers were the lack of promotion of the system at headquarters' level, and the main concerns of the specialists were the lack of feedback about patient follow-up. Nonetheless, both referrers and specialists recognized the benefits of telemedicine in improving patient management, providing education, and reducing isolation in the field.

Indexed as

humanitarianlow-resource settingteleconsultationtele-expertisetelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID26636057
PMCPMC4653300
OpenAlexW2181792525

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.