ArticleBMJ open2022
Experiences of patients and health care professionals on the quality of telephone follow-up care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a large qualitative study in a multidisciplinary academic setting.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Organizing substitution of oncological follow-up to primary care: perspectives from secondary care providers.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Article
- Patient Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence and Telemedicine in Dermatology: Narrative Review.JMIR dermatology · 2025Review
- 'I Do It All Alone': The Burdens and Benefits of Being Diagnosed With, and Treated for, Colorectal Cancer During the Covid-19 Pandemic.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Review
- Management of pain in cancer patients- lessons from practices during the COVID-19: a qualitative study of cancer care providers' perspectives.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Citizens' perspectives on relocating care: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Medication management of COVID-19 patients during transition to virtual models of care: a qualitative study.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2023Article
- COVID-19 Patients' Medication Management during Transition of Care from Hospital to Virtual Care: A Cross-Sectional Survey and Audit.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Telemedicine in Care of Sarcoma Patients beyond the COVID-19 Pandemic: Challenges and Opportunities.Cancers · 2023Review
- Experiences of cancer care in COVID-19: A longitudinal qualitative study.European journal of oncology nursing : the official journal of European Oncology Nursing Society · 2022Article
- 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
14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the perceived quality of follow-up telephone consultations (TCs) from the perspective of patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) of multiple medical disciplines during the COVID-19 pandemic.
designA qualitative study using semi-structured interviews and reflexive thematic analysis.
settingSeven medical disciplines (general dermatology, dermato-oncology, head and neck oncology, internal medicine, medical oncology, gynaecological oncology and surgical oncology) at a large university hospital in the Netherlands.
participantsPatients who received and HCPs who provided TCs as a substitute for outpatient follow-up appointments during the COVID-19 pandemic.
resultsEighty-two patients and 58 HCPs were interviewed. Predominantly, patients and HCPs were satisfied with the quality of care by TCs. They regarded TCs as efficient, accessible and of acceptable quality, provided there was an established patient-HCP relationship, medical complaints were absent and physical examination was not indicated. However, most patients were worried about the accuracy of their health assessment in the absence of physical examination and non-verbal communication. Both patients and HCPs wish to use TCs in the future alternatively with face-to-face consultations.
conclusionThis study concludes that TCs seem a valuable contribution to the context of follow-up care and could partially replace face-to-face consultations. TCs can be performed in stable, chronic patients with whom a doctor-patient relationship has already been established. Face-to-face consultations are considered more appropriate in the case of new patients, challenging or emotionally charged consultations and when clinically relevant physical examination is indicated. Due to the context-dependent nature of experiences of patients and HCPs, TCs should be used with an individually customised approach based on patient and disease specifics, in which shared decision-making plays an extensive role. Before major implementation is considered, sufficient data on the safety regarding missed diagnoses or cancer recurrences should be assembled first.
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.