ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2022
Telehealth experiences of providers and patients who use augmentative and alternative communication.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inclusive Digital Health Strategies for Persons With Disabilities: A Scoping Review.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- How COVID-19 impacted people with disabilities: A qualitative study in Delaware.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe explore the telehealth experiences of adults who use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) and clinicians who work with people using AAC. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted semistructured, online interviews with 6 adults who use AAC and 8 clinicians who provide telehealth services to people who use AAC between July and September 2020. Participants were located in the United States and the United Kingdom. All participants had engaged in 2 or more telehealth visits in the past 6 months. We used an inductive, thematic approach to analyze the interview data.
resultsOur findings reveal that (1) telehealth is an essential service, (2) technology causes barriers, (3) policies meant to protect actually inhibit, and (4) remote monitoring devices have the potential to mitigate risks. DISCUSSION: Telehealth systems created for persons without disabilities do not provide equitable access to everyone. Telehealth should be flexible enough to allow patients to use the communication modality that best meets their needs. We suggest that healthcare systems think of the healthcare ecosystem as one which includes a variety of telehealth options in addition to traditional in-person clinical visits.
conclusionsThe benefits of telehealth for people who use AAC are substantial and should be an option for ongoing health care. However, the accessibility of telehealth technologies needs to be improved. Designers should view telehealth as part of a broad healthcare ecosystem, which includes in-person, telehealth, and remote health monitoring technologies. Designers should also include AAC users in the design and development process. Telehealth policies should encourage multimodality access to health care and address funding concerns.
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.