ArticleJournal of European CME2022
Benefits of Providing Feedback and Utilisation Metrics to Specialists on Their Participation in eConsult.
Article in Journal of European CME, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Surgeon's Field Guide to Value-Based Specialty Care.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Review
- Increased access to pediatric specialist healthcare using eConsult: A retrospective observational cohort and case-control study.Paediatrics & child health · 2025Article
- Formalizing the curbside: digitally enhancing access to specialty care.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our study evaluates the impact of feedback sent to specialists participating in eConsult services. eConsult Specialists from two eConsult services in Ontario, Canada, received feedback on their use of eConsult via bi-annual specialist reports. An 11-item survey was developed to evaluate the impact, content, and distribution process of these specialist reports. We distributed 742 specialist reports in March 2021 and surveyed the specialists in July 2021. Our findings show that specialists largely felt that the feedback received validated their efforts (83%) and that receiving the report made them more likely to continue to participate in the eConsult service (59%). Most did not feel judged (74%) or distressed (79%) by the reports, and 72% said that reporting the median self-reported billing time did not impact their own billing times. Overall, eConsult services can capture, report and aggregate data valuable to specialists and is useful for Continuing Professional Development. Benefits and lack of risk implementing this type of feedback should encourage other services to consider similar processes.
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.