Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33006571›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2020

Harnessing Telemedicine for the Provision of Health Care: Bibliometric and Scientometric Analysis.

Ahmed Waqas, Soo Huat Teoh, Luís Velez Lapão, Luiz Ary Messina, Jorge César Correia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Global characteristics and trends in research onFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

5 authors.

Ahmed WaqasInstitute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3772-194X
Soo Huat TeohLifestyle Science Cluster, Advanced Medical and Dental Institute, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-5735-6441
Luís Velez LapãoGlobal Health and Tropical Medicine, Instituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-0506-1294
Luiz Ary MessinaTelemedicine University Network, Rede Nacional de Ensino e Pesquisa, Brasília, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-1422-3892
Jorge César CorreiaUnit of Patient Education, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetology, Nutrition and Patient Education, Department of Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals and University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7020-0695

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn recent decades, advances in information technology have given new momentum to telemedicine research. These advances in telemedicine range from individual to population levels, allowing the exchange of patient information for diagnosis and management of health problems, primary care prevention, and education of physicians via distance learning.

objectiveThis scientometric investigation aims to examine collaborative research networks, dominant research themes and disciplines, and seminal research studies that have contributed most to the field of telemedicine. This information is vital for scientists, institutions, and policy stakeholders to evaluate research areas where more infrastructural or scholarly contributions are required.

methodsFor analyses, we used CiteSpace (version 4.0 R5; Drexel University), which is a Java-based software that allows scientometric analysis, especially visualization of collaborative networks and research themes in a specific field.

resultsWe found that scholarly activity has experienced a significant increase in the last decade. Most important works were conducted by institutions located in high-income countries. A discipline-specific shift from radiology to telestroke, teledermatology, telepsychiatry, and primary care was observed. The most important innovations that yielded a collaborative influence were reported in the following medical disciplines, in descending order: public environmental and occupational health, psychiatry, pediatrics, health policy and services, nursing, rehabilitation, radiology, pharmacology, surgery, respiratory medicine, neurosciences, obstetrics, and geriatrics.

conclusionsDespite a continuous rise in scholarly activity in telemedicine, we noticed several gaps in the literature. For instance, all the primary and secondary research central to telemedicine was conducted in the context of high-income countries, including the evidence synthesis approaches that pertained to implementation aspects of telemedicine. Furthermore, the research landscape and implementation of telemedicine infrastructure are expected to see exponential progress during and after the COVID-19 era.

Indexed as

BibliometricsResearchTelemedicineBetacoronavirusCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19Delivery of Health CareEducation, DistanceEnvironmental HealthHealth PolicyHumansNursingOccupational HealthPandemicsPhysiciansPneumonia, Viralevidence synthesishealth information technologyresearchscientometric analysistelemedicinetheme

Identifiers

PMID33006571
PMCPMC7568215

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.