Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35495745›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in surgery2022

Telemedicine and Telehealth in Urology-What Do the 'Patients' Think About It?

Nithesh Naik, B M Zeeshan Hameed, Sanjana Ganesh Nayak, Anshita Gera, Shreyas Raghavan Nandyal, Dasharathraj K Shetty, Milap Shah, Sufyan Ibrahim, Aniket Naik, Nagaraj Kamath and 5 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Virtual medicine in urology: Is it here to stay?Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
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

15 authors.

Nithesh NaikDepartment of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
B M Zeeshan HameediTRUE (International Training and Research in Uro-oncology and Endourology) Group, Manipal, India.
Sanjana Ganesh NayakDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Anshita GeraDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Shreyas Raghavan NandyalGandhi Medical College, Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences, Secunderabad, India.
Dasharathraj K ShettyDepartment of Humanities and Management, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Milap ShahiTRUE (International Training and Research in Uro-oncology and Endourology) Group, Manipal, India.
Sufyan IbrahimiTRUE (International Training and Research in Uro-oncology and Endourology) Group, Manipal, India.
Aniket NaikKasturba Medical College, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Nagaraj KamathKasturba Medical College, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Delaram MahdaviamiriManipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Kenisha Kevin D'costaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Bhavan Prasad RaiiTRUE (International Training and Research in Uro-oncology and Endourology) Group, Manipal, India.
Piotr ChlostaDepartment of Urology, Jagiellonian University in Krakow, Kraków, Poland.
Bhaskar K SomaniiTRUE (International Training and Research in Uro-oncology and Endourology) Group, Manipal, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Telemedicine is the delivery of healthcare to patients who are not in the same location as the physician. The practice of telemedicine has a large number of advantages, including cost savings, low chances of nosocomial infection, and fewer hospital visits. Teleclinics have been reported to be successful in the post-surgery and post-cancer therapy follow-up, and in offering consulting services for urolithiasis patients. This review focuses on identifying the outcomes of the recent studies related to the usage of video consulting in urology centers for hematuria referrals and follow-up appointments for a variety of illnesses, including benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), kidney stone disease (KSD), and urinary tract infections (UTIs) and found that they are highly acceptable and satisfied. Certain medical disorders can cause embarrassment, social exclusion, and also poor self-esteem, all of which can negatively impair health-related quality-of-life. Telemedicine has proven beneficial in such patients and is a reliable, cost-effective patient-care tool, and it has been successfully implemented in various healthcare settings and specialties.

Indexed as

COVID-19patients perspectivetelehealthtelemedicineurology

Identifiers

PMID35495745
PMCPMC9051070

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.