Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37020234›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2023

Telehealth in remote Australia: a supplementary tool or an alternative model of care replacing face-to-face consultations?

Supriya Mathew, Michelle S Fitts, Zania Liddle, Lisa Bourke, Narelle Campbell, Lorna Murakami-Gold, Deborah J Russell, John S Humphreys, Edward Mullholand, Yuejen Zhao and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Dietary E-Health Interventions for Adults With Severe Mental Illness: A Systematic Review.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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

16 authors.

Supriya MathewMenzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Alice Springs, NT, Australia. supriya.mathew@menzies.edu.au.
Michelle S FittsMenzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Alice Springs, NT, Australia.
Zania LiddleMenzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Alice Springs, NT, Australia.
Lisa BourkeDepartment of Rural Health, The University of Melbourne, Shepparton, VIC, Australia.
Narelle CampbellFlinders Rural and Remote Health Northern Territory, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Darwin, NT, Australia.
Lorna Murakami-GoldPocheSA+NT, Flinders University, Alice Springs, NT, Australia.
Deborah J RussellMenzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Alice Springs, NT, Australia.
John S HumphreysSchool of Rural Health, Monash University, Bendigo, VIC, Australia.
Edward MullholandMiwatj Health Aboriginal Corporation, Nhulunbuy, NT, Australia.
Yuejen ZhaoNorthern Territory Department of Health, Darwin, NT, Australia.
Michael P JonesSchool of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, North Ryde, NSW, Australia.
John BoffaCentral Australian Aboriginal Congress, Alice Springs, NT, Australia.
Mark RamjanTop End Population and Primary Health Care, Northern Territory Government, Casuarina, NT, Australia.
Annie TangeyNgaanyatjarra Health Service, Alice Springs, NT, Australia.
Rosalie SchultzNgaanyatjarra Health Service, Alice Springs, NT, Australia.
John WakermanMenzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Alice Springs, NT, Australia.

Funding

Australian Research Council Discovery Project DP190100328
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic increased the use of telehealth consultations by telephone and video around the world. While telehealth can improve access to primary health care, there are significant gaps in our understanding about how, when and to what extent telehealth should be used. This paper explores the perspectives of health care staff on the key elements relating to the effective use of telehealth for patients living in remote Australia.

methodsBetween February 2020 and October 2021, interviews and discussion groups were conducted with 248 clinic staff from 20 different remote communities across northern Australia. Interview coding followed an inductive approach. Thematic analysis was used to group codes into common themes.

resultsReduced need to travel for telehealth consultations was perceived to benefit both health providers and patients. Telehealth functioned best when there was a pre-established relationship between the patient and the health care provider and with patients who had good knowledge of their personal health, spoke English and had access to and familiarity with digital technology. On the other hand, telehealth was thought to be resource intensive, increasing remote clinic staff workload as most patients needed clinic staff to facilitate the telehealth session and complete background administrative work to support the consultation and an interpreter for translation services. Clinic staff universally emphasised that telehealth is a useful supplementary tool, and not a stand-alone service model replacing face-to-face interactions.

conclusionTelehealth has the potential to improve access to healthcare in remote areas if complemented with adequate face-to-face services. Careful workforce planning is required while introducing telehealth into clinics that already face high staff shortages. Digital infrastructure with reliable internet connections with sufficient speed and latency need to be available at affordable prices in remote communities to make full use of telehealth consultations. Training and employment of local Aboriginal staff as digital navigators could ensure a culturally safe clinical environment for telehealth consultations and promote the effective use of telehealth services among community members.

Indexed as

COVID-19TelemedicineAustraliaHumansPandemicsReferral and ConsultationAboriginal peopleDigital healthFirst NationsRemote consultationTelehealthTelemedicineVideo consultation

Identifiers

PMID37020234
PMCPMC10074370

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.