Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35855966›Full record

ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2022

The long game: Telemedicine patient satisfaction metrics and methods of recurrence detection for gynecologic cancer patients throughout the initial year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Rachel P Mojdehbakhsh, Arielle C Mora Hurtado, Shitanshu Uppal, Hailey Milakovich, Ryan J Spencer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rachel P MojdehbakhshDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin, School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, United States.
Arielle C Mora HurtadoUniversity of Wisconsin, School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, United States.
Shitanshu UppalDivision of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.
Hailey MilakovichUniversity of Wisconsin, School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, United States.
Ryan J SpencerDivision of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, United States.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · USUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The primary aim of this study was to evaluate gynecologic cancer patients' satisfaction with telemedicine visits over a one-year period during the COVID-19 pandemic. The secondary aim was to characterize how gynecologic cancer recurrence was detected with high telemedicine utilization. Methods: A survey study and a retrospective cohort study of patients participating in telemedicine visits between April 20, 2020 and March 30, 2021 in a gynecologic oncology clinic were undertaken. To assess patient satisfaction with telemedicine visits, the Telemedicine Satisfaction Survey (TeSS) was administered to patients by phone. Retrospective chart review was conducted to gather clinical data regarding diagnosis, treatment, and recurrence. Results: Three hundred and sixteen patients completed the TeSS for a response rate of 80.2%. Patients rated the following aspects of the telemedicine encounter as good or excellent: quality of technology (97.8%), personal comfort (90.8%), length-of-visit (95.2%), treatment explanation (93.7%), overall experience (92.7%). Moreover, 87.0% of patients would use telemedicine again. Retrospective data was collected for 394 patients, 312 of which had invasive cancer (79.2%). Twenty-nine (7.4%) patients experienced a recurrence during the study period. The most common method of detection was patient-reported symptoms (n = 17, 58.6%). The remaining recurrences were diagnosed by scheduled biomarkers (n = 7, 24.1%), scheduled imaging (n = 4, 13.8%) and asymptomatic exam (n = 1, 3.4%). Conclusions: After one year of the COVID-19 pandemic and the implementation of routine telehealth visits, gynecologic cancer patients were overwhelmingly satisfied with the use of telemedicine. During this period, recurrences were most often diagnosed by patient-reported symptoms.

Indexed as

Cancer recurrenceCOVID-19Gynecologic oncologyPatient satisfactionTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID35855966
PMCPMC9287468
OpenAlexW4284962447

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.