Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32035106›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Academy of Dermatology2020

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of teledermatology: Where are we now, and what are the barriers to adoption?

Robin H Wang, John S Barbieri, Harrison P Nguyen, Robert Stavert, Howard P Forman, Jean L Bolognia, Carrie L Kovarik, Group for Research of Policy Dynamics in Dermatology

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.6field-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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 120 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review of Teledermatology: Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic.American journal of clinical dermatology · 2024
    Review
  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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Robin H WangUniversity of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
John S BarbieriDepartment of Dermatology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: john.barbieri@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.
Harrison P NguyenDepartment of Dermatology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia.
Robert StavertDepartment of Dermatology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
Howard P FormanDepartment of Public Health (Health Policy), Economics, and Management, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
Jean L BologniaDepartment of Dermatology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Carrie L KovarikDepartment of Dermatology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Group for Research of Policy Dynamics in Dermatology
University of Pennsylvania · USYale University · USBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USEmory University · US

Funding

Penn Dermatology Research Training ProgramT32AR007465 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Elizabeth Anne Grice, David Joel Margolis · 1986 to 2026
$9.0M
NIAMS NIH HHS T32 AR007465
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There has been rapid growth in teledermatology over the past decade, and teledermatology services are increasingly being used to support patient care across a variety of care settings. Teledermatology has the potential to increase access to high-quality dermatologic care while maintaining clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness. Recent expansions in telemedicine reimbursement from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) ensure that teledermatology will play an increasingly prominent role in patient care. Therefore, it is important that dermatologists be well informed of both the promises of teledermatology and the potential practice challenges a continuously evolving mode of care delivery brings. In this article, we will review the evidence on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of teledermatology and we will discuss system-level and practice-level barriers to successful teledermatology implementation as well as potential implications for dermatologists.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisCenters for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S.DermatologyHealth Plan ImplementationHealth PolicyHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInsurance, Health, ReimbursementSkin DiseasesTelemedicineTreatment OutcomeUnited Statesbarrierscost-effectivenesshealth care costsmedicolegalreimbursementstore-and-forwardteledermatology

Identifiers

PMID32035106
PMCPMC7302990
OpenAlexW3004717924

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.