Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37153752›Full record

ArticleNeurology. Clinical practice2023

Linked Patient and Provider Impressions of Outpatient Teleneurology Encounters.

Justin G James, Jane Park, Alexandria Oliver, Sharon X Xie, Andrew Siderowf, Meredith Spindler, Lawrence R Wechsler, Thomas F Tropea

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurology. Clinical practice, 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  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

8 authors.

Justin G JamesDepartment of Neurology (JGJ, JP, AO, AS, MS, LRW, TFT), Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; CW Psychological Services (JP), King of Prussia, PA; and Department of Biostatistics (SXX), Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1799-3603
Jane ParkDepartment of Neurology (JGJ, JP, AO, AS, MS, LRW, TFT), Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; CW Psychological Services (JP), King of Prussia, PA; and Department of Biostatistics (SXX), Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Alexandria OliverDepartment of Neurology (JGJ, JP, AO, AS, MS, LRW, TFT), Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; CW Psychological Services (JP), King of Prussia, PA; and Department of Biostatistics (SXX), Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Sharon X XieDepartment of Neurology (JGJ, JP, AO, AS, MS, LRW, TFT), Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; CW Psychological Services (JP), King of Prussia, PA; and Department of Biostatistics (SXX), Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Andrew SiderowfDepartment of Neurology (JGJ, JP, AO, AS, MS, LRW, TFT), Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; CW Psychological Services (JP), King of Prussia, PA; and Department of Biostatistics (SXX), Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Meredith SpindlerDepartment of Neurology (JGJ, JP, AO, AS, MS, LRW, TFT), Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; CW Psychological Services (JP), King of Prussia, PA; and Department of Biostatistics (SXX), Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3632-2613
Lawrence R WechslerDepartment of Neurology (JGJ, JP, AO, AS, MS, LRW, TFT), Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; CW Psychological Services (JP), King of Prussia, PA; and Department of Biostatistics (SXX), Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Thomas F TropeaDepartment of Neurology (JGJ, JP, AO, AS, MS, LRW, TFT), Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; CW Psychological Services (JP), King of Prussia, PA; and Department of Biostatistics (SXX), Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0766-1496

Funding

Research Education ComponentP30AG072979 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI DAVID A WOLK · 2021 to 2026
$24.8M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG072979
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Teleneurology is common in clinical practice partly due to the SARS CoV-2 pandemic. Impressions about teleneurology from patients and providers alike are generally favorable; some of the reported benefits include ease of access to specialized health care, savings of time and money, and similar quality of care as an in-person visit. However, comparisons between patient and provider impressions about the same teleneurology encounter have not been described. In this study, we describe patient impressions about a teleneurology encounter and evaluate concordance with provider impressions about the same encounter. Methods: Patients and providers at the University of Pennsylvania Hospital Neurology Department were surveyed about their impressions of teleneurology between April 27, 2020, and June 16, 2020. A convenience sample of patients, whose providers completed a questionnaire, were contacted by telephone to solicit their impressions about the same encounter. Unique questionnaires for patients and providers focused on similar themes, such as adequacy of technology, assessment of history obtained, and overall quality of the visit. Summaries of patient responses are reported with the raw percent agreement between patients and providers for similar questions. Results: One hundred thirty-seven patients completed the survey; 64 (47%) were male and 73 (53%) were female. Sixty-six (47%) patients had a primary diagnosis of PD, 42 (30%) a non-PD/parkinsonism movement disorder, and 29 (21%) a nonmovement disorder neurologic disease. One hundred one (76%) were established patient visits and 36 (26%) were new patient visits. Provider responses from 8 different physicians were included. Most of the patients responded that the ease of joining their visit, their comfort engaging with their physicians during their visit, understanding their plan of care after their visit, and the quality of care from their teleneurology visit were satisfactory. Patients and providers agreed about their impressions of the quality of the history obtained (87% agreement), patient-provider relationship (88% agreement), and overall quality of their experience (70% agreement). Discussion: Patients had favorable impressions about their clinical experience with teleneurology and expressed an interest in incorporating telemedicine visits into their ongoing care. Patients and providers were highly concordant for the history obtained, patient-provider relationship, and overall quality.

Identifiers

PMID37153752
PMCPMC10155606

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.