Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36935672›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2023

Equitable psychiatry, telehealth, and the COVID-19 pandemic: Analysis of national data.

Thomas Yeatman, Joanne Enticott, Vinay Lakra, Graham Meadows

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. 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
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Observational
  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

4 authors.

Thomas YeatmanDepartment of Psychiatry, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Joanne EnticottMonash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Vinay LakraMental Health Services, Northern Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Graham MeadowsSouthern Synergy, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was foreseen that the number of face-to-face psychiatry consultations would suffer a reduction. In order to compensate, the Australian Government introduced new Medicare-subsidized telephone and video-linked consultations. This study investigates how these developments affected the pre-existing inequity of psychiatry service delivery in Australia. Methods: The study analyses five and a half years of national Medicare data listing all subsidized psychiatry consultation consumption aggregated to areas defined as Statistical Area level 3 (SA3s; which have population sizes of 30 k-300 k). Face-to-face, video-linked and telephone consultations are considered separately. The analysis consists of presenting rates of consumption, concentration graphs, and concentration indices to quantify inequity, using Socio Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) scores to rank the SA3 areas according to socio-economic disadvantage. Results: There is a 22% drop in the rate of face-to-face psychiatry consultation consumption across Australia in the final study period compared with the last study period predating the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the loss is made up by the introduction of the new subsidized telephone and video-linked consultations. Referring to the same time periods, there is a reduction in the inequity of the distribution of face-to-face consultations, where the concentration index reduces from 0.166 to 0.129. The new subsidized video-linked consultations are distributed with severe inequity in the great majority of subpopulations studied. Australia-wide, video-linked consultations are also distributed with gross inequity, with a concentration index of 0.356 in the final study period. The effect of this upon overall inequity was to cancel out the reduction of inequity resulting from the reduction of face-to face appointments. Conclusion: Australian subsidized video-linked psychiatry consultations have been distributed with gross inequity and have been a significant exacerbator of the overall inequity of psychiatric service provision. Future policy decisions wishing to reduce this inequity should take care to reduce the risk posed by expanding telepsychiatry.

Indexed as

COVID-19Data AnalysisPandemicsPsychiatryTelemedicineAdultAustraliaHealthcare DisparitiesHumansMental HealthMiddle AgedOffice VisitsRemote ConsultationRural HealthUrban HealthVideoconferencingconcentration indexCOVID-19equitypsychiatrytelehealthtelepsychiatryvideo consultations

Identifiers

PMID36935672
PMCPMC10014820

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read16
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.