Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36660334›Full record

ArticleGynecology and minimally invasive therapy

Is Endometriosis Telemedicine Friendly?

Burcin Karamustafaoglu Balci

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gynecology and minimally invasive therapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Burcin Karamustafaoglu BalciDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Istanbul University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Social isolation and lockdowns made telemedicine to gradually penetrate daily practice. Telemedicine has been used successfully in many areas of medicine such as psychiatry but is new in obstetrics and gynecology. This study aimed to investigate whether a telemedicine model would be feasible in choosing patients who needed face-to-face visits during the pandemic. Materials and Methods: Telephone calls were conducted with patients with endometriosis who were admitted to our endometriosis clinic before the pandemic. The primary outcome was to appropriately triage the patients who could postpone their routine visit without any risk and those who needed an in-clinic appointment. Results: Seventy-nine patients were included in the study. Among 58 patients who could be reached, 55 accepted to participate in the study. The mean length of the telephone calls was 8.17 min. Nine patients required an in-clinic appointment (16.4%), whereas 46 (83.6%) patients were managed with the phone call. Compliance with hormonal agents for the treatment of endometriosis-associated pain was 11/17 (64.7%). The most commonly asked questions by patients were about cervical screening, fertility cryopreservation, and the medical treatment options of endometriosis. Conclusion: Telemedicine visits can never replace in-clinic practice but can help with a considerable degree of efficacy in the management of patients with endometriosis.

Indexed as

Endometriosispaintelehealthtelemedicinetelevisittreatment compliance

Identifiers

PMID36660334
PMCPMC9844039
OpenAlexW4296368089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.