Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32784177›Full record

ReviewJMIR medical informatics2020

Utilization Barriers and Medical Outcomes Commensurate With the Use of Telehealth Among Older Adults: Systematic Review.

Clemens Kruse, Joanna Fohn, Nakia Wilson, Evangelina Nunez Patlan, Stephanie Zipp, Michael Mileski

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR medical informatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 154 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
154citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
29.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

154 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 275 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

94 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Clemens Kruse *School of Health Administration, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7636-1086
Joanna Fohn *School of Health Administration, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8621-5691
Nakia Wilson *School of Health Administration, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0169-0184
Evangelina Nunez Patlan *School of Health Administration, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6129-7598
Stephanie Zipp *School of Health Administration, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8106-197X
Michael Mileski *School of Health Administration, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1503-6869
Texas State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRising telehealth capabilities and improving access to older adults can aid in improving health outcomes and quality of life indicators. Telehealth is not being used ubiquitously at present.

objectiveThis review aimed to identify the barriers that prevent ubiquitous use of telehealth and the ways in which telehealth improves health outcomes and quality of life indicators for older adults.

methodsThis systematic review was conducted and reported in accordance with the Kruse protocol and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Reviewers queried the following four research databases: Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, and Embase (Science Direct). Reviewers analyzed 57 articles, performed a narrative analysis to identify themes, and identified barriers and reports of health outcomes and quality of life indicators found in the literature.

resultsReviewers analyzed 57 studies across the following five interventions of telehealth: eHealth, mobile health (mHealth), telemonitoring, telecare (phone), and telehealth video calls, with a Cohen κ of 0.75. Reviewers identified 14 themes for barriers. The most common of which were technical literacy (25/144 occurrences, 17%), lack of desire (19/144 occurrences, 13%), and cost (11/144 occurrences, 8%). Reviewers identified 13 medical outcomes associated with telehealth interventions. The most common of which were decrease in psychological stress (21/118 occurrences, 18%), increase in autonomy (18/118 occurrences, 15%), and increase in cognitive ability (11/118 occurrences, 9%). Some articles did not report medical outcomes (18/57, 32%) and some did not report barriers (19/57, 33%).

conclusionsThe literature suggests that the elimination of barriers could increase the prevalence of telehealth use by older adults. By increasing use of telehealth, proximity to care is no longer an issue for access, and thereby care can reach populations with chronic conditions and mobility restrictions. Future research should be conducted on methods for personalizing telehealth in older adults before implementation.

trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42020182162; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020182162. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/15490.

Indexed as

barriershealth outcomesolder adultstelehealthtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID32784177
PMCPMC7450384
OpenAlexW3040316091

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.