ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2021
Accuracy of periocular lesion assessment using telemedicine.
Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of ophthalmology telemedicine in a large health care system beyond initial pandemic crisis.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Accuracy of trained technicians in screening orbital and adnexal diseases at rural vision centers in South India.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Introducing the 'Benign Eyelid Lesion Pathway': 1 year experience of synchronous tele-oculoplastics in a tertiary hospital.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Perceptions of Jordanians Toward Adopting and Using Telemedicine: National Cross-sectional Study.JMIR human factors · 2022Article
- Telemedicine as an auxiliary tool in trichiasis treatment follow-up.Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the agreement in diagnosis and management plans reached between clinicians reviewing eyelid lesions remotely and in face-to-face clinics.
methodsIn this single-centre observational case series, data were prospectively collected on 50 consecutive adults referred with eyelid lesions suitable to be seen by a nurse. A proforma was completed to gather salient information. A nurse specialist saw patients in face-to-face clinics and collected information using the proforma, devising a diagnosis and management plan. Photographs of the eyelid lesions were taken by a medical photographer. A subsequent remote review was completed by an oculoplastic consultant using the proforma information and photographs in the absence of the patient. The diagnosis and management plan constructed by the nurse specialist were compared with those reached by the consultant.
resultsComplete data were available for 44 consecutive cases. There was an overall 91% agreement (40 cases out of 44) between the diagnoses reached by the nurse specialist, and the remote reviewer; kappa coefficient 0.88 (95% CI 0.76 to 0.99). There was an overall 82% agreement (36 out of 44 cases) in the management plans devised by the nurse-led clinic and remote reviewer; kappa coefficient 0.74 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.90). The average time taken for a remote reviewer to reach a diagnosis and management plan was 1 min and 20 s.
conclusionsThis study evaluated the feasibility of assessing eyelid lesions using asynchronous telemedicine. There was overall a high rate of concordance in the diagnosis reached, and management devised between the clinic and remote review.
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.