Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36567431›Full record

SynthesisJournal of telemedicine and telecare2024

Telehealth-guided provider-to-provider communication to improve rural health: A systematic review.

Annette M Totten, Dana M Womack, Jessica C Griffin, Marian S McDonagh, Cynthia Davis-O'Reilly, Ian Blazina, Sara Grusing, Nancy Elder

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of telemedicine and telecare, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Annette M TottenOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9100-8678
Dana M WomackOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Jessica C GriffinOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Marian S McDonaghOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Cynthia Davis-O'ReillyOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Ian BlazinaOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Sara GrusingOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Nancy ElderOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTelehealth may address healthcare disparities for rural populations. This systematic review assesses the use, effectiveness, and implementation of telehealth-supported provider-to-provider collaboration to improve rural healthcare.

methodsWe searched Ovid MEDLINE®, CINAHL®, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from 1 January 2010 to 12 October 2021 for trials and observational studies of rural provider-to-provider telehealth. Abstracts and full text were dual-reviewed. We assessed the risk of bias for individual studies and strength of evidence for studies with similar outcomes.

resultsSeven studies of rural uptake of provider-to-provider telehealth documented increases over time but variability across geographic regions. In 97 effectiveness studies, outcomes were similar with rural provider-to-provider telehealth versus without for inpatient consultations, neonatal care, outpatient depression and diabetes, and emergency care. Better or similar results were reported for changes in rural clinician behavior, knowledge, confidence, and self-efficacy. Evidence was insufficient for other clinical uses and outcomes. Sixty-seven (67) evaluation and qualitative studies identified barriers and facilitators to implementing rural provider-to-provider telehealth. Success was linked to well-functioning technology, sufficient resources, and adequate payment. Barriers included lack of understanding of rural context and resources. Methodologic weaknesses of studies included less rigorous study designs and small samples. DISCUSSION: Rural provider-to-provider telehealth produces similar or better results versus care without telehealth. Barriers to rural provider-to-provider telehealth implementation are common to practice change but include some specific to rural adaptation and adoption. Evidence gaps are partially due to studies that do not address differences in the groups compared or do not include sufficient sample sizes.

Indexed as

TelemedicineCommunicationHumansRural HealthRural Health ServicesExtension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO)remote consultationsRural healthsystematic reviewtelehealthtelemedicinevideo education

Identifiers

PMID36567431
PMCPMC11389081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.