ArticleBMJ neurology open2022
Evaluation of telemedicine for new outpatient neurological consultations.
Article in BMJ neurology open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- REMOTE-Neuro: co-produced recommendations to optimise remote neurology.BMJ neurology open · 2026Article
- Functional neurological disorders among hospitalized patients in a resource-limited setting: current situation in Colombia and paths to improvement.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Article
- Association of Outpatient Follow-Up With 30-Day Readmission After Epilepsy or Seizure Discharge in Medicare Beneficiaries Aged 65 and Older.Neurology · 2025Article
- Virtual Compared With In-Person Neurologic Examination Study.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2024Article
- Response to the Letter Concerning the Publication: Neuroimaging in Functional Neurological Disorder: State of the Field and Research Agenda. Perez DL et al. Neuroimage Clin. 2021;30:102623.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2024Article
- The Lasting impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on outpatient neurology consultations.BMJ neurology open · 2024Article
- The First Case Series From Japan of Primary Headache Patients Treated by Completely Online Telemedicine.Cureus · 2022Article
- The Tell on Telehealth.Epilepsy currentsReview
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic has broadened the use of teleneurology, how this compares with face-to-face (F2F) clinics is unclear. This study compared virtual with F2F new neurological consultations. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated new outpatient consultations in neurology clinics in Aberdeen Royal Infirmary. We compared sociodemographic data, time to consultation, time to diagnosis, the need for reassessment and re-investigation between traditional F2F and virtual clinics using the web-based Results: 73% of consultations were virtual ( Conclusion: This study demonstrates that virtual clinics have higher rates of reassessment and re-investigation than F2F clinics. As virtual clinics become a potential consultation alternative, this study should instruct the selection of patients for either consultation type.
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.