Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35688719›Full record

ArticlePatient education and counseling2022

Exploring cancer patients', caregivers', and clinicians' utilisation and experiences of telehealth services during COVID-19: A qualitative study.

Sarah J Smith, Allan Ben Smith, William Kennett, Shalini K Vinod

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Patient education and counseling, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Gauging the Changing Landscape: Telehealth Perceptions among Hispanic Females with Breast Cancer.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
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

4 authors.

Sarah J SmithPort Macquarie Rural Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Port Macquarie, Australia.
Allan Ben SmithSouth West Sydney Clinical Campuses, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia; Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: ben.smith@unsw.edu.au.
William KennettWauchope District Memorial Hospital and Port Macquarie Base Hospital, Mid North Coast Local Health District, Australia.
Shalini K VinodSouth West Sydney Clinical Campuses, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia; Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Sydney, Australia; Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool Hospital, South West Sydney Local Health District, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted oncology. With pandemic restrictions limiting close contact between individuals, telehealth (the use of teleconferencing/videoconferencing to conduct real-time medical consultations) has been increasingly utilised. This qualitative study aimed to explore adult cancer patient, caregiver, and clinician (doctor, nurse, allied health) telehealth experiences during COVID-19 in urban and rural Australian settings and identify potential enablers and barriers to sustained telehealth implementation.

methodsEnglish-speaking participants completed semi-structured interviews regarding their telehealth experiences since March 2020. Interviews ceased when data saturation occurred. Iterative thematic analysis was conducted using NVivo 12 Pro.

resultsThirty-four interviews (clinician=14, patient=13, caregiver=7) were conducted from April to August 2021. Analysis generated seven themes relating to telehealth use: 1) Acceptability as a form of consultation, 2) Impacts on healthcare provision, 3) Communication & relationships, 4) Efficient form of consultation, 5) Comfort of conducting telehealth in different environments, 6) Technological barriers and 7) Future preferences.

conclusionsThe rapid uptake of telehealth during the pandemic has mostly been well-received, and telehealth can be appropriately used in oncology. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Barriers including providing appropriate facilities, technology, and telehealth training; and selecting appropriate patients must be addressed to enable sustained telehealth use in future cancer care.

Indexed as

COVID-19NeoplasmsTelemedicineAdultAustraliaCaregiversHumansPandemicsCancerCOVID-19ExperiencesQualitativeTelehealth

Identifiers

PMID35688719
PMCPMC9170274

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.