Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36729459›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Assessment of Pediatric Telemedicine Using Remote Physical Examinations With a Mobile Medical Device: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

Rafaela Wagner, Thalita Cecília Lima, Marielen Ribeiro Tavares da Silva, Anna Clara Pereira Rabha, Marinei Campos Ricieri, Mariana Millan Fachi, Rogério Carballo Afonso, Fábio Araújo Motta

Abstract readControlled Clinical Trial
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 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Patient Self-Recorded Digital Otoscopy in Otology Diagnostics.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Interactive Virtual Presence: A New Tool for Remote Healthcare.Advances in clinical medical research & healthcare delivery · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
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.

Rafaela WagnerDepartment of Telehealth, Hospital Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Thalita Cecília LimaDepartment of Clinical Research, Hospital Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Marielen Ribeiro Tavares da SilvaDepartment of Clinical Research, Hospital Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Anna Clara Pereira RabhaEmergency Department, Sabará Hospital Infantil, São Paulo, Brazil.
Marinei Campos RicieriDepartment of Clinical Research, Hospital Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Mariana Millan FachiValue Management Office, Hospital Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Rogério Carballo AfonsoDepartment of Innovation and Business Development, Sabará Hospital Infantil, São Paulo, Brazil.
Fábio Araújo MottaDepartment of Clinical Research, Hospital Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The number of innovations in health care based on the use of platforms, digital devices, apps, and artificial intelligence has grown exponentially in recent years. When used correctly, these technologies allow inequities in access to health care to be addressed by optimizing care and reducing social and geographic barriers. However, most of the technological health care solutions proposed have not undergone rigorous clinical studies. Objective: To assess the concordance between measurements from a remote physical examination using a mobile medical device and measurements from a conventional in-person physical examination. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nonrandomized controlled trial was conducted from January 1 to December 31, 2020. The clinical parameters compared were heart rate; body temperature; heart, lung, and abdominal auscultation; otoscopy; throat and oral examination; and skin examination. A total of 690 patients with clinical stability and various symptoms who were seen in the emergency department of 2 Brazilian pediatric hospitals were eligible to enter this study. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was concordance between measurements from a telemedicine physical examination using a mobile medical device and measurements from a conventional in-person physical examination. The secondary outcome was the specificity and sensitivity of the digital device, considering the conventional in-person consultation as the gold standard. Results: Among 690 patients, the median (IQR) age at study entry was 5 (1-9) years; 348 (50.4%) were female, and 331 (48.0%) presented with a chronic disease. Regarding the primary outcome, the concordance values were 90% or greater for skin examination (94% for rash, 100% for hemorrhagic suffusion, and 95% for signs of secondary infection), characteristics of the mucosa (98% for hydration and 97% for coloring), and heart (95% for murmur, 97% for rhythms, and 98% for sounds), lung (91% for adventitious sounds, 97% for vesicular sounds, and 90% for fever), and abdominal (92% for abdominal sounds) auscultations. Concordance values were lower for otoscopy (72% for the ear canal and 86% for the tympanic membrane), throat and oral examination (72%), and rhinoscopy (79% for mucosa and 81% for secretion). The specificity was greater than 70% (ranging from 74.5% for the ear canal to 99.7% for hemorrhagic suffusion) for all variables. The sensitivity was greater than 52% for skin examination (58.0% for rash and 54.8% for signs of secondary infection), throat and oral examination (52.7%), and otoscopy (66.1% for the ear canal and 64.4% for the tympanic membrane). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, measurements from remote physical examination with a mobile medical device had satisfactory concordance with measurements from in-person physical examination for otoscopy, throat and oral examination, skin examination, and heart and lung auscultation, with limitations regarding heart and lung auscultation in infants and abdominal auscultation in children of all ages. Measurements from remote physical examination via a mobile medical device were comparable with those from in-person physical examination in children older than 2 years. These findings suggest that telemedicine may be an alternative to in-person examination in certain contexts and may help to optimize access to health care services and reduce social and geographic barriers. Trial Registration: Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials Identifier: RBR-346ymn.

Indexed as

CoinfectionExanthemaTelemedicineArtificial IntelligenceChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantMalePhysical Examination

Identifiers

PMID36729459
PMCPMC9896296

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.