Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33824502›Full record

SynthesisGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2021

Videoconferencing to deliver genetics services: a systematic review of telegenetics in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Elizabeth G Brown, Isabella Watts, Emily R Beales, Ashwini Maudhoo, Judith Hayward, Eamonn Sheridan, Imran Rafi

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

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

7 authors.

Elizabeth G BrownSt George's University of London, Department of Academic Primary Care, London, UK.
Isabella WattsSt George's University of London, Department of Academic Primary Care, London, UK. Iwatts@sgul.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-1974-2365
Emily R BealesSt George's University of London, Department of Academic Primary Care, London, UK.
Ashwini MaudhooSt George's University of London, Department of Academic Primary Care, London, UK.
Judith HaywardYorkshire and Humber Genomics Medicine Centre, Leeds, UK.
Eamonn SheridanBritish Society for Genetic Medicine, Leeds, UK.
Imran RafiSt George's University of London, Department of Academic Primary Care, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe COVID-19 pandemic has forced reorganization of clinical services to minimize face-to-face contact between patients and health-care providers. Specialist services, including clinical genetics, must consider methods of remote delivery including videoconferencing-termed telegenetics. This review evaluates the evidence for telegenetics and its applicability to future service development.

methodsA systematic review of six databases was conducted to identify studies from 2005 onward using synchronous videoconferencing to deliver clinical genetics services. Included studies compared telegenetics to an alternative method or used a before and after design.

resultsThirteen studies met the inclusion criteria (eight compared telegenetics to in-person consultations and three to telephone delivery). Patient satisfaction, genetic knowledge, and psychosocial outcomes were similar for in-person and telegenetic counseling. There was some evidence that telegenetics may be superior to telephone delivery for knowledge gain and reduction in anxiety and depression. There is limited evidence concerning the effect of telegenetics on provider satisfaction and behavioral outcomes. Conclusions are limited by at least moderate risk of bias in all evaluated studies and small sample sizes.

conclusionAcross most outcomes measured, telegenetics had equivalent outcomes to in-person appointment; however, the extent to which the available evidence is applicable to longer-term use is debatable.

Indexed as

COVID-19TelemedicineGenetic CounselingHumansPandemicsPatient SatisfactionSARS-CoV-2Videoconferencing

Identifiers

PMID33824502
PMCPMC8023770

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.