ArticleCureus2020
A Cross-Sectional Survey on Telemedicine Use for Doctor-Patient Communication.
Article in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors Influencing the Implementation of a Multispecialty Virtual Ward Program in the United Kingdom: Qualitative Exploration of Staff Experiences and Perspectives.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Empowering Patients in the Digital Age: New Framework to Measure and Improve Patient Digital Experiences.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2024Review
- Patients' perspectives on digital health tools.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- Telemedicine allows for effective communication between a medically complex cancer patient and his virtual hospital medical team.Clinical case reports · 2022Article
- Bridging the Telemedicine Gap Among Seniors During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of patient experience · 2021Article
- Patients' Perception of Telemedicine in a Large Urban Inner-City Emergency Department: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Cureus · 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
7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Use of computers for doctor-patient communication is increasing. Considering effective doctor-patient communication is important for good health outcomes. This study helps to determine the level of acceptance of telemedicine in general public and factors associated with it. Methods: This survey with cross-sectional analysis comprised a brief survey with 15 questions. The survey was distributed in public places to determine the opinions of the general public. Results Randomly selected 125 participants completed the questionnaire. Synchronous telemedicine was favored by young people (82% in the 18-34 age group vs 37.5% of participants aged >55 years; p<0.01), those with a higher education level (46.7% of non-college-educated persons vs 80.6% of college-educated persons; p<0.01), and frequent computer users (67% who used a computer for less than two hours a month vs 86.5% of those who used a computer more than hours a month; p=0.03). Asynchronous communication, like sending health information to doctors via a safe portal was acknowledged mostly by people who had used patient portals in the past (84.1% vs 65.4%; p=0.02). Use of patient portals was less among older users and senior citizens (20.8% use in the age group >55 vs. 51.3% in the age group 35-53 years vs. 71% in age group 18-34 years). Receiving video education for specific health concerns was favored by those who used a computer frequently (94.6% who used a computer more than two hours a month vs 77% who used a computer less than two hours a month; p =0.02). Conclusion Telemedicine is generally favored, but physicians should be mindful about older people as they may not feel comfortable. Step by step guidance should be provided especially to senior citizens for telemedicine and portal use.
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.