Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35937265›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Telemedicine solutions for clinical care delivery during COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping review.

Raheleh Ganjali, Mahdie Jajroudi, Azam Kheirdoust, Ali Darroudi, Ashraf Alnattah

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
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.

Raheleh GanjaliClinical Research Development Unit, Emam Reza Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Mahdie JajroudiDepartment of Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Azam KheirdoustDepartment of Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Ali DarroudiDepartment of Health Information Technology, Faculty of Paramedicine, Mashhad University of Medical Science, Mashhad, Iran.
Ashraf AlnattahDepartment of Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Mashhad University of Medical Sciences · IREmam Reza Hospital · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The unexpected emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has changed mindsets about the healthcare system and medical practice in many fields, forcing physicians to reconsider their approaches to healthcare provision. It is necessary to add new, unique, and efficient solutions to traditional methods to overcome this critical challenge. In this regard, telemedicine offers a solution to this problem. Remote medical activities could diminish unnecessary visits and provide prompt medical services in a timely manner. Objective: This scoping review aimed to provide a map of the existing evidence on the use of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic by focusing on delineation functions and technologies, analyzing settings, and identifying related outcomes. Methods: This review was conducted following the Arksey and O'Malley framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. PubMed and Scopus databases were systematically searched based on specific eligibility criteria. The English publications included in this study focused on telemedicine systems implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic to provide clinical care services. Two independent reviewers screened the articles based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The relevant features of telemedicine systems were summarized and presented into the following four domains and their subcategories, including functionality, technology, context, and outcomes. Results: Out of a total of 1,602 retrieved papers, 66 studies met the inclusion criteria. The most common function implemented was counseling, and telemedicine was used for diagnosis in seven studies. In addition, in 12 studies, tele-monitoring of patients was performed by phone, designed platforms, social media, Bluetooth, and video calls. Telemedicine systems were predominantly implemented synchronously (50 studies). Moreover, 10 studies used both synchronous and asynchronous technologies. Although most studies were performed in outpatient clinics or centers, three studies implemented a system for hospitalized patients, and four studies applied telemedicine for emergency care. Telemedicine was effective in improving 87.5% of health resource utilization outcomes, 85% of patient outcomes, and 100% of provider outcomes. Conclusion: The benefits of using telemedicine in medical care delivery systems in pandemic conditions have been well-documented, especially for outpatient care. It could potentially improve patient, provider, and healthcare outcomes. This review suggests that telemedicine could support outpatient and emergency care in pandemic situations. However, further studies using interventional methods are required to increase the generalizability of the findings.

Indexed as

COVID-19TelemedicineAmbulatory Care FacilitiesHumansPandemicscontextCOVID-19functioninformation technologyoutcomessettingtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID35937265
PMCPMC9354887
OpenAlexW4286559806

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.