Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35846972›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in surgery2022

Telemedicine and Telehealth in Urology: Uptake, Impact and Barriers to Clinical Adoption.

Nithesh Naik, Shreyas Raghavan Nandyal, Sanjana Ganesh Nayak, Milap Shah, Sufyan Ibrahim, B M Zeeshan Hameed, Ananth Patil, Gopika Suresh, Pritam A Shetty, Bhavan Prasad Rai and 7 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 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

17 authors.

Nithesh NaikDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Shreyas Raghavan NandyalGandhi Medical College, Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences, Secunderabad, Telangana, India.
Sanjana Ganesh NayakDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Milap ShahiTRUE (International Training and Research in Uro-oncology and Endourology) Group, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Sufyan IbrahimiTRUE (International Training and Research in Uro-oncology and Endourology) Group, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
B M Zeeshan HameediTRUE (International Training and Research in Uro-oncology and Endourology) Group, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Ananth PatilA.J. Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Mangalore, Karnataka, India.
Gopika SureshKasturba Medical College, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Pritam A ShettyKasturba Medical College, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Bhavan Prasad RaiiTRUE (International Training and Research in Uro-oncology and Endourology) Group, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Rajeev TpDepartment of Urology, Government Medical College Hospital, Guwahati, India.
Patrick RiceDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Suraj Jayadeva ReddyDepartment of Urology, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Nandakishore BhatDepartment of Urology, Father Muller Medical College, Mangalore, Karnataka, India.
Deepesh GargDepartment of Information and Communication Technology, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, 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, Karnataka, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Telemedicine has great potential in urology as a strong medium for providing patients with continuous high-quality urological care despite the hurdles involved in its implementation. Both clinicians and patients are crucial factors in determining the success of tele-consults in terms of simplicity of use and overall satisfaction. For it to be successfully incorporated into routine urological practice, rigorous training and evidence-based recommendations are lacking. If these issues are addressed, they can provide a significant impetus for future tele-consults in urology and their successful deployment, even beyond the pandemic, to assure safer and more environment-friendly patient management.

Indexed as

COVID-19patient satisfactiontelehealthtelemedicineurology

Identifiers

PMID35846972
PMCPMC9280027

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.