Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34231953›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2021

Genetic counselor experiences with telehealth before and after COVID-19.

Rachel Mills, Ian M MacFarlane, Colleen Caleshu, Margaret A Ringler, Heather A Zierhut

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Maternal and neonatal risk-appropriate care: gaps, strategies, and areas for further research.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rachel MillsMS Genetic Counseling Program, University of North Carolina Greensboro, Greensboro, NC, USA.
Ian M MacFarlaneDepartment of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Colleen CaleshuGeneMatters, LLC, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Margaret A RinglerDepartment of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Heather A ZierhutDepartment of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
University of Minnesota · USUniversity of North Carolina at Greensboro · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While genetic counselor (GC) utilization of telehealth has increased in recent years, the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic significantly accelerated the adoption of telehealth for many. We investigated GC experiences with telehealth including perceived advantages, disadvantages, and barriers using a one-time online survey of GCs who provided direct patient care in recent years. The survey examined experiences with telehealth before and after the onset of COVID-19. We made broad comparisons to findings from a similar study our research team conducted five years ago. GCs reported an increase in the utilization of telehealth over time, with significant increases from pre-2017 (44%) to pre-COVID-19 (70%) and then to present (87%) (p<.001 and .02, respectively). There was no significant change in the total number of hours worked from pre-COVID-19 to the time of survey completion, nor were there significant changes in the amount of time spent on clinical responsibilities or interfacing with patients. However, the total number of hours worked in telehealth significantly increased (z = 5.05, p<.001) as did the percent of time spent interacting with patients via telehealth [t(72)=3.74, p<.001, d = 0.44]. Participants overwhelmingly preferred video (84%) over telephone; this differs from our previous survey where video was the preferred modality for 59% (p<.001). We utilized open-ended questions to elicit reasons for modality preference. The most-cited barrier to telehealth utilization was billing/reimbursement issues, with 39% noting this obstacle. This is consistent with our previous study where 30% cited billing/reimbursement as the primary barrier. These findings indicate a need for continued efforts to improve billing and reimbursement for genetic counseling offered via telehealth. They also present an opportunity for additional exploration regarding patient preferences for telehealth modality.

Indexed as

CounselorsCOVID-19Genetic CounselingTelemedicineFemaleHealth Care SurveysHumansMalePandemicsCOVID-19genetic counselorstelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID34231953
PMCPMC8426975
OpenAlexW3178500185

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.