Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36331536›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022

Virtual Care and Electronic Patient Communication During COVID-19: Cross-sectional Study of Inequities Across a Canadian Tertiary Cancer Center.

Amir H Safavi, Mike Lovas, Zhihui Amy Liu, Sheena Melwani, Tran Truong, Shayla Devonish, Nazek Abdelmutti, Ambreen Sayani, Danielle Rodin, Alejandro Berlin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

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

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

10 authors.

Amir H SafaviRadiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6106-1374
Mike LovasSmart Cancer Care Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9911-8508
Zhihui Amy LiuPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1537-4868
Sheena MelwaniSmart Cancer Care Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1712-4435
Tran TruongData Science Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2427-743X
Shayla DevonishSmart Cancer Care Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0738-7813
Nazek AbdelmuttiPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7296-551X
Ambreen SayaniWomen's College Research Institute, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5391-7769
Danielle RodinRadiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8279-0621
Alejandro BerlinRadiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1880-6905

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVirtual care (VC) visits (telephone or video) and email-based patient communication have been rapidly adopted to facilitate cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Inequities in access and patient experience may arise as these digital health tools become prevalent.

objectiveWe aimed to characterize inequities in access and patient-reported experience following adoption of digital health tools at a tertiary cancer center during the COVID-19 pandemic.

methodsWe designed a cross-sectional study of outpatients with visits from September to December 2020. Patient characteristics and responses to an email-based patient-experience survey were collated. Inequities in access were assessed across three pairs of comparison groups: (1) patients with VC and in-person visits, (2) patients with and without documented email addresses, and (3) responders and nonresponders to the survey. Inequities in patient-reported experience were assessed among survey responders. Demographics were mapped to area-level averages from national census data. Socioeconomic status was mapped to area-level dimensions of the Canadian Index of Multiple Deprivation. Covariate balance between comparison groups was assessed using standardized mean differences (SMDs), with SMD≥0.2 indicating differences between groups. Associations between patient experience satisfaction scores and covariates were assessed using multivariable analyses, with P<.05 indicating statistical significance.

resultsAmong the 42,194 patients who had outpatient visits, 62.65% (n=26,435) had at least one VC visit and 31.15% (n=13,144) were emailable. Access to VC and email was similar across demographic and socioeconomic indices (SMD<0.2). Among emailable patients, 21.84% (2870/13,144) responded to the survey. Survey responsiveness was similar across indices, aside from a small difference by age (SMD=0.24). Among responders, 24.4% received VC and were similar to in-person responders across indices (SMD<0.2). VC and in-person responders had similar satisfaction levels with all care domains surveyed (all P>.05). Regardless of visit type, patients had variable satisfaction with care domains across demographic and socioeconomic indices. Patients with higher ethnocultural composition scores were less satisfied with the cultural appropriateness of their care (odds ratio [OR] 0.70, 95% CI 0.57-0.86). Patients with higher situational vulnerability scores were less satisfied with discussion of physical symptoms (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.48-0.93). Patients with higher residential instability scores were less satisfied with discussion of both physical (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.97) and emotional (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.77-0.96) symptoms, and also with the duration of their visit (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.74-0.98; P=.02). Male patients were more satisfied with how their health care provider had listened to them (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.11-2.44; P=.01).

conclusionsAdoption of VC and email can equitably maintain access and patient-reported experience in cancer care across demographics and socioeconomic indices. Existing health inequities among structurally marginalized patients must continue to be addressed to improve their care experience.

Indexed as

COVID-19NeoplasmsTelemedicineCanadaCommunicationCross-Sectional StudiesElectronicsHumansMalePandemicsPatient Satisfactioncancer careCOVID-19cross sectionaldigital dividedigital healtheHealthelectronic mailengagementexperiencehealth inequalityhealth inequitiesoncologypatient reportedsatisfactiontelehealthtelemedicinevirtual care

Identifiers

PMID36331536
PMCPMC9640204

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.