ArticleAnnals of family medicine2020
Patients Assess an eConsult Model's Acceptability at 5 US Academic Medical Centers.
Article in Annals of family medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Communication Strategies to Promote Patient Engagement in Telemedicine: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Continuous Glucose Monitoring-Enhanced eConsult Improves Clinical Outcomes in Adults Living With Diabetes in a Safety Net Primary Care Setting.Journal of diabetes research · 2025Observational
- A qualitative investigation of uninsured patient and primary care provider perspectives on specialty care eConsults.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Perspectives of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases on e-consultation in transmural care: a qualitative study : Is privacy really an issue?BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Evaluation of BASE eConsult Manitoba: patient perspectives on the use of electronic consultation to improve access to specialty advice in Manitoba.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Optimizing e-Consultations to Adolescent Medicine Specialists: Qualitative Synthesis of Feedback From User-Centered Design.JMIR human factors · 2021Article
- Professional continuous glucose monitoring and endocrinology eConsult for adults with type 2 diabetes in primary care: Results of a clinical pilot program.Journal of clinical & translational endocrinology · 2021Article
- How primary healthcare in Iceland swiftly changed its strategy in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.BMJ open · 2020Observational
- Comparing Patients' Experiences with Electronic and Traditional Consultation: Results from a Multisite Survey.Journal of general internal medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeElectronic consultation (eConsult), involving asynchronous primary care clinician-to-specialist consultation, is being adopted at a growing number of health systems. Most evaluations of eConsult programs have assessed clinical and financial impacts and clinician acceptability. Less attention has been focused on patients' opinions. We set out to understand patient perspectives and preferences for hypothetical eConsult use at 5 US academic medical centers in the process of adopting an eConsult model.
methodsWe invited adult primary care patients to participate in focus groups. Participants were introduced to the eConsult model, considered its potential benefits and drawbacks, judged the acceptability of a hypothetical copay, and expressed their preferences for future involvement in eConsult decision making and communication. Thematic analysis was used for data interpretation.
resultsOne focus group was conducted at each of the 5 sites with a total of 52 participants. Focus groups responded positively to the idea of eConsult, with quicker access to specialty care and convenience identified as key benefits. Approval was particularly high among those with a trusted primary care clinician. Preference for involvement in eConsult decision making and communication varied and enthusiasm about eConsult waned when a hypothetical copay was introduced. Concerns included potential misuse of eConsult and exclusion of the patient's illness narrative in the eConsult exchange.
conclusionsPrimary care patients expressed strong support for eConsult, particularly when used by a trusted primary care clinician, in addition to voicing several concerns. Patient involvement in eConsult outreach and education efforts could help to enhance the model's effectiveness and acceptability.
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.