ArticleInternational journal of integrated care
Asynchronous Remote Communication as a Tool for Care Management in Primary Care: A Rapid Review of the Literature.
Article in International journal of integrated care. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Article
- Acceptability of Guided Symptom Entry and Asynchronous Clinical Communication Software Among Primary Care Staff: Qualitative Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Implementation of a Web-Based Outpatient Asynchronous Consultation Service: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Effectiveness and safety of asynchronous telemedicine consultations in general practice: a systematic review.BJGP open · 2024Article
- Impact of COVID-19 on the Pediatric Primary Care Model in Catalonia: Analysis of Changes in the Number and Type of Face-to-Face and Remote Visits.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To review the available evidence on asynchronous communication models between primary care professionals and patients in different countries around the world in order to analyse the added value that this model brings to patients and professionals. Design: A rapid literature review was conducted using the World Health Organisation guidance to include a variety of studies on the concept of asynchronous communications between primary care and patients in different countries. Data sources: The search for articles was carried out in PubMed and Google Academics and with the contribution of telemedicine experts from the Catalan Institute of Health. Selection of studies: The review included 271 articles. The inclusion criteria were: publications from 2010 onwards, in English, Spanish or Catalan, focused on asynchronous communications between primary care professionals and patients to improve patient management. After discarding duplicates and applying the exclusion criteria (255 articles), 16 were included for further review. Data extraction: The rapid literature review was conducted by an evaluator; detecting 5 main general themes: reduction of face-to-face visits, available services and most frequent uses, characteristics and perceptions of primary care professionals, characteristics and perceptions of users, and barriers and facilitators for the implementation of asynchronous teleconsultation. Results: A total of sixteen studies were included, including seven quantitative studies, seven qualitative studies and two mixed studies. Conclusions: The high degree of satisfaction of both users and professionals, the outbreak of COVID-19 and the effectiveness and efficiency of asynchronous remote communications are key factors for the implementation and improvement in the management of the different healthcare systems across the world.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.