Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36719682›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Estimated Carbon Emissions Savings With Shifts From In-Person Visits to Telemedicine for Patients With Cancer.

Krupal B Patel, Brian D Gonzalez, Kea Turner, Amir Alishahi Tabriz, Dana E Rollison, Edmondo Robinson, Cristina Naso, Xuefeng Wang, Philippe E Spiess

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing 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

38 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. The Carbon Footprint of In-person Versus Virtual Orthopaedic Care.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2025
    Article
  9. Estimation of carbon footprint in nuclear medicine: illustration of a french department.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. It is time to consider the climate crisis in haematology.Clinical hematology international · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Krupal B PatelDepartment of Head and Neck and Endocrine Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida.
Brian D GonzalezDepartment of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida.
Kea TurnerDepartment of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida.
Amir Alishahi TabrizDepartment of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida.
Dana E RollisonDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida.
Edmondo RobinsonDepartment of Internal and Hospital Medicine, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida.
Cristina NasoVirtual Health Program, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida.
Xuefeng WangDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida.
Philippe E SpiessVirtual Health Program, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: While the health care community advocates broadly for climate change policy, medical professionals can look within care practices to assess their contribution to carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, and provide solutions wherever possible. Telemedicine can help in mitigating climate change by providing care from a distance. Objective: To assess the carbon savings achieved from telemedicine visits. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study of telemedicine visits was conducted at a single-institution National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated comprehensive cancer center. Eligible patients were aged 18 years and above, completed telemedicine visits from April 1, 2020, to June 20, 2021, and had a Florida mailing address documented in their electronic medical record. Groups were divided between those within driving time of 60 minutes (1-way) to the cancer center vs those living beyond 60 minutes of drive time. Data were analyzed between April 2020 and June 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Carbon emission savings from telemedicine, measured in total and average per-visit savings. Results: A total 49 329 telemedicine visits with 23 228 patients were conducted from April 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021. A total 21 489 visits were for patients with driving time of 60 minutes or less (median [IQR] age, 62.0 [52.0-71.0] years; 12 334 [57.4%] female; 1685 [7.8%] Black, 1500 [7.0%] Hispanic, 16 010 [74.5%] non-Hispanic White), while 27 840 visits were for patients with driving time greater than 60 minutes (median [IQR] age, 67.0 [57.0-74.0] years; 14 372 [51.6%] female; 1056 [3.8%] Black, 1364 [5.0%] Hispanic, 22 457 [80.7%] non-Hispanic White). For patients living within a driving time of 60 minutes from the cancer center, 424 471 kg CO2 emissions were saved (mean [SD] emissions savings, 19.8 [9.4] kg CO2 per visit) due to telemedicine-equivalent to 91.5 passenger vehicles driven for 1 year. For patients whose driving distance was greater than 60 minutes, 2 744 248 kg CO2 emissions were saved (mean emissions savings, 98.6 [54.8] kg CO2 per visit)-equivalent to 591 passenger vehicles driven for 1 year. Conclusions and Relevance: Using a large data set, this cross-sectional analysis highlighted the carbon emissions savings due to telemedicine in oncology. This has important implications in reducing health care-related carbon footprint.

Indexed as

Automobile DrivingNeoplasmsTelemedicineAgedCarbon DioxideCross-Sectional StudiesDelivery of Health CareFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedCarbon Dioxide

Identifiers

PMID36719682
PMCPMC9890284

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.