Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36812543›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2022

General practitioners' perceptions of using virtual primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic: An international cross-sectional survey study.

Edmond Li, Rosy Tsopra, Geronimo Jimenez, Alice Serafini, Gustavo Gusso, Heidrun Lingner, Maria Jose Fernandez, Greg Irving, Davorina Petek, Robert Hoffman and 17 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS digital health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Virtual Care and Compassion for Migrants and Refugees: A Scoping Review.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Evolution of the general practice receptionist role and online services: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Exploring Compassionate Care in Virtual Rehabilitation: Qualitative Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

27 authors.

Edmond LiInstitute of Global Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8209-4490
Rosy TsopraINSERM, Université de Paris, Sorbonne Université, Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Information Sciences to support Personalized Medicine, F-75006 Paris, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9406-5547
Geronimo JimenezCenter for Population Health Sciences (CePHaS), Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1304-426X
Alice SerafiniLocal Health Authority of Modena, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7396-2839
Gustavo GussoUniversidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7488-7535
Heidrun LingnerHannover Medical School, Center for Public, Health and Healthcare, German Center for Lung Research (DZL) / BREATH Hannover, Germany.
Maria Jose FernandezLeiro Health Center, Leiro, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7101-589X
Greg IrvingHealth Research Institute, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9471-3700
Davorina PetekDepartment of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Robert HoffmanDepartment of Family Medicine, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3053-835X
Vanja LazicUniversity of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9336-3534
Ensieh MemarianDepartment of Clinical Sciences in Malmö, Lund University, Internal Medicine- Epidemiology Research Group, Skane University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8214-917X
Tuomas KoskelaGeneral Practice, Tampere University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Technology and Tampere University Hospital, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1518-4944
Claire CollinsIrish College of General Practitioners, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8967-5159
Sandra Milena EspitiaColombian Family Medicine Society, Colombia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7799-4045
Ana ClaveríaGalicia South Health Research Institute, Vigo, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9552-1260
Katarzyna NesslerDepartment of Family Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Braden Gregory O'NeillMAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2164-8263
Kyle HoedebeckeDepartment of Utilization Management, Oscar Health, Dallas, United States of America.
Mehmet UnganDepartment of Family Medicine, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6078-2177
Liliana LaranjoWestmead Applied Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1020-3402
Saira GhafurInstitute of Global Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Gianluca FontanaInstitute of Global Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8973-0012
Azeem MajeedDepartment of Primary Care & Public Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2357-9858
Josip CarCenter for Population Health Sciences (CePHaS), Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore.
Ara DarziInstitute of Global Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7815-7989
Ana Luisa NevesInstitute of Global Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the onset of COVID-19, general practitioners (GPs) and patients worldwide swiftly transitioned from face-to-face to digital remote consultations. There is a need to evaluate how this global shift has impacted patient care, healthcare providers, patient and carer experience, and health systems. We explored GPs' perspectives on the main benefits and challenges of using digital virtual care. GPs across 20 countries completed an online questionnaire between June-September 2020. GPs' perceptions of main barriers and challenges were explored using free-text questions. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. A total of 1,605 respondents participated in our survey. The benefits identified included reducing COVID-19 transmission risks, guaranteeing access and continuity of care, improved efficiency, faster access to care, improved convenience and communication with patients, greater work flexibility for providers, and hastening the digital transformation of primary care and accompanying legal frameworks. Main challenges included patients' preference for face-to-face consultations, digital exclusion, lack of physical examinations, clinical uncertainty, delays in diagnosis and treatment, overuse and misuse of digital virtual care, and unsuitability for certain types of consultations. Other challenges include the lack of formal guidance, higher workloads, remuneration issues, organisational culture, technical difficulties, implementation and financial issues, and regulatory weaknesses. At the frontline of care delivery, GPs can provide important insights on what worked well, why, and how during the pandemic. Lessons learned can be used to inform the adoption of improved virtual care solutions and support the long-term development of platforms that are more technologically robust and secure.

Identifiers

PMID36812543
PMCPMC9931239

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.