ArticleDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)2022
Establishing a telemedicine program for interventional radiology: a study of patient opinion and experience.
Article in Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Carbon footprint of the Chinese healthcare service: An environmentally extended input-output analysis.PLoS medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PURPOSE The COVID-19 pandemic forced healthcare officials to implement new policies, such as the use of virtual consultations over office-based medical appointments, to reduce the transmission of the virus. The purpose of this study is to quantitatively compare patients' experiences with virtual outpatient telemedicine encounters at a single academic institution in Interventional Radiology (IR) and in-person visits during the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS The TeleENT Satisfaction Questionnaire and the Medical Communication Competence Scale (MCCS) were used to survey patients' satisfaction with both in-person and virtual office visits. RESULTS Ninety respondents (38 in-person, 52 virtual) acknowledged numerous benefits of virtual visits versus in-person office visits including reductions in time, cost, and potential viral transmission risk during the COVID-19 pandemic. No statistically significant difference was noted, based on a Likert scale from 1 to 7, between in-person and virtual visits (all p > 0.05) for scheduling related factors. No statistically significant difference was noted in any of the MCCS subscales between the two cohorts in regards to medical information communication (all p > 0.05). A majority of patients with virtual encounters (82.7%) stated that it was easy to obtain an electronic device for use during the telemedicine visit, and 73.1% of patients felt that setting up the telemedicine encounter was easy. CONCLUSION This study demonstrates that telemedicine is an acceptable alternative to in-office appointments and could increase access to IR care outside of the traditional physician-patient interaction. With telemedicine visits, patients can communicate their concerns and obtain information from the doctor with noninferior communication compared to in-person visits.
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.