Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32184212›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2020

Exploring patients' and clinicians' experiences of video consultations in primary care: a systematic scoping review.

Arun Thiyagarajan, Calum Grant, Frances Griffiths, Helen Atherton

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 112 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
112citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

112 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. The Role of Optometry in the Delivery of Eye Care via Telehealth: A Systematic Literature Review.Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2022
    Pooled it
  6. Delivery of supported self-management in remote asthma reviews: A systematic rapid realist review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Factors Influencing Patient Satisfaction with Healthcare Services in Poland.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

52 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Arun ThiyagarajanHonorary Research Fellow, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Warwick, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0305-4392
Calum GrantMedical Student, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Warwick, UK.
Frances GriffithsCentre for Health Policy, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Helen AthertonAssociate Professor, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Warwick, UK h.atherton@warwick.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7072-1925

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVideo consultation (VC) is an emerging consultation mode in general practice. The challenges and benefits of implementing it are not necessarily realised until it is in use, and being experienced by patients and clinicians. To date, there has been no review of the evidence about how patients and clinicians experience VC in general practice.

aimThe study aimed to explore both patients' and clinicians' experiences of VCs in primary care. DESIGN &

settingA systematic scoping review was carried out of empirical studies.

methodAll major databases were searched for empirical studies of any design, published from 1 January 2010 to 11 October 2018 in the English language. Studies were included where synchronous VCs occurred between a patient and a clinician in a primary care setting. Outcomes of interest related to experience of use. The quality of included studies were assessed. Findings were analysed using narrative synthesis.

resultsSeven studies were included in the review. Patients reported being satisfied with VC, describing reduced waiting times and travel costs as a benefit. For patients and clinicians, VC was not deemed appropriate for all presentations and all situations, and a face-to-face consultation was seen as preferable where this was possible.

conclusionThe findings of this scoping review show that primary care patients and clinicians report both positive and negative experiences when using VCs, and these experiences are, to a certain extent, context dependent. VC is potentially more convenient for patients, but is not considered superior to a face-to-face consultation. Accounts of experience are useful in the planning and implementation of any VC service.

Indexed as

patient satisfactionphysician—patient relationsprimary health careremote consultationtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID32184212
PMCPMC7330183

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.