Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36348966›Full record

ArticleZdravstveno varstvo2022

Remote Consultations in General Practice - A Systematic Review.

Staša Vodička, Erika Zelko

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Zdravstveno varstvo, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Staša VodičkaMurska Sobota Community Health Centre, Grajska ulica 24, 9000 Murska Sobota, Slovenia.
Erika ZelkoLeitung Institut für Allgemeinmedizin, Medizinische Fakultät Linz, Linz Austria.
Pomurski muzej Murska Sobota · SI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Remote consultations in general practice can be very useful form of telemedicine, which is basically a way to exchange medical information to improve the clinical health of patients when the patient and their general practitioner (GP) are not on the same place at the same time. This concept was developed in the 1980s to provide health care to patients who lived in remote areas. Methods: We were interested in researching what kind of remote consultations are available in general practice and what is the usage of these methods. We used four keywords - remote consultation and general practice or family medicine or primary care - and we searched in four different scientific databases: Medline-PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and IEEX Xplore. Results: We used a PRISMA diagram to identify studies and search the four main databases, we investigated 48 full text articles and when we applied our inclusion and exclusion criteria, 12 studies were included in this systematic review. Conclusions: This systematic review covers the topics of remote consultation versus a traditional or classic physical consultation. Studies have shown its importance prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and its value while in the mist of the pandemic then caring for infected patients. We have found that remote consultation is necessary, but it must be an improvement on the previous system. Teleconsultations can reduce the number of visits, especially during lockdown situations, with both patients and GPs satisfied with the method, but we should not forget that a physical consultation cannot be fully replaced by a remote consultation due to the limitations of the latter.

Indexed as

family medicinegeneral practiceprimary careremote consultationsatisfaction

Identifiers

PMID36348966
PMCPMC9597895
OpenAlexW4301397325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.