Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35922103›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Electronic consultation in correctional facilities worldwide: a scoping review.

Claire Sethuram, Mary Helmer-Smith, Sathya Karunananthan, Erin Keely, Jatinderpreet Singh, Clare Liddy

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Advancing equity and value in United States healthcare: an umbrella review.International journal for equity in health · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

Claire SethuramC.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyere Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4964-0183
Mary Helmer-SmithC.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyere Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7745-7012
Sathya KarunananthanC.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyere Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Erin KeelyOntario eConsult Centre of Excellence, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Jatinderpreet SinghDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Clare LiddyC.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyere Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada cliddy@bruyere.org.ORCID 0000-0003-0699-5494

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo provide an overview of the use of and evidence for eConsult in correctional facilities worldwide.

designScoping review. DATA SOURCES: Three academic databases (MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL) were searched to identify papers published between 1990 and 2020 that presented data on eConsult use in correctional facilities. The grey literature was also searched for any resources that discussed eConsult use in correctional facilities. Articles and resources were excluded if they discussed synchronous, patient-to-provider or unsecure communication. The reference lists of included articles were also hand searched.

resultsOf the 226 records retrieved from the academic literature search and 595 from the grey literature search, 22 were included in the review. Most study populations included adult male offenders in a variety of correctional environments. These resources identified 13 unique eConsult services in six countries. Six of these services involved multiple medical specialties, while the remaining services were single specialty. The available evidence was organised into five identified themes: feasibility, cost-effectiveness, access to care, provider satisfaction and clinical impact.

conclusionsThis study identified evidence that the use of eConsult in correctional facilities is beneficial and avoids unnecessary transportation of offenders outside of the facilities. It is feasible, cost-effective, increases access to care, has an impact on clinical care and has high provider satisfaction. Some gaps in the literature remain, and we suggest further research on patient satisfaction, enablers and barriers to implementation, and women, youth and transgender populations in this setting to inform service providers and stakeholders. Despite some gaps, eConsult is evidently an important tool to provide timely, high-quality care to offenders.

Indexed as

MedicineRemote ConsultationAdolescentAdultCorrectional FacilitiesFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMaleQuality of Health CareINTERNAL MEDICINEPRIMARY CAREQuality in health careTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID35922103
PMCPMC9352998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.