ArticleClinical and experimental dermatology2021
Experience and perception of face-to-face vs. remote consultations: a patient survey across two UK dermatology centres.
Article in Clinical and experimental dermatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient perceptions of artificial intelligence integration in dermatology: a cross-sectional study of trust, comfort and equity across multiple care modalities.Skin health and disease · 2026Article
- Patient Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence and Telemedicine in Dermatology: Narrative Review.JMIR dermatology · 2025Review
- The Effect of Remote Digital Services on Health Care Inequalities Among People Under Long-Term Dermatology Follow-Up: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.JMIR dermatology · 2023Article
- Telephone consultations in the COVID-19 era versus pre-COVID face-to-face consultations: a survey of dermatology patient perceptions.Archives of dermatological research · 2023Article
- Mohs micrographic surgery outcomes following virtual consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic.Clinical and experimental dermatology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33259673What 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.