SynthesisZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2023
Digitalization and disruptive change in rheumatology.
Synthesis in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRecently, many sectors have seen disruptive changes due to the rapid progress in information and communication technology (ICT). The aim of this systematic literature review was to develop a first understanding of what is known about new ICTs in rheumatology and their disruptive potential.
methodsPubMed, LIVIVO, and EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS) databases were searched for relevant literature. Use of new ICTs was identified, categorized, and disruptive potential was discussed. Articles from 2008 to 2021 in German and English were considered.
resultsA total of 3539 articles were identified. After application of inclusion/exclusion criteria, 55 articles were included in the analyses. The majority of articles (48) used a non-experimental design or detailed expert opinion. The new ICTs mentioned in these articles could be allocated to four main categories: technologies that prepare for the development of new knowledge by data collection (n = 32); technologies that develop new knowledge by evaluation of data (e.g., by inventing better treatment; n = 11); technologies that improve communication of existing knowledge (n = 32); and technologies that improve the care process (n = 29). Further assessment classified the ICTs into different functional subcategories. Based on these categories it is possible to estimate the disruptive potential of new ICTs.
conclusionICTs are becoming increasingly important in rheumatology and may impact patients' lives and professional conduct. The properties and disruptive potential of technologies identified in the articles differ widely. When looking into ICTs, doctors have focused on new diagnostic and therapeutic procedures but rarely on their disruptive potential. We recommend putting more effort into investigation of whether ICTs change the way rheumatology is performed and who is in control of it. Especially technologies that potentially replace physicians with machines, take control over the definition of quality in medicine, and/or create proprietary knowledge that is not accessible for doctors need more research.
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.