Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37755531›Full record

ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024

Status quo and future directions of digitalization in gynecology and obstetrics in Germany: a survey of the commission Digital Medicine of the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics.

André Pfob, Christoph Hillen, Katharina Seitz, Sebastian Griewing, Sven Becker, Christian Bayer, Uwe Wagner, Peter Fasching, Markus Wallwiener, Kommission Digitale Medizin, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Gebursthilfe (DGGG)

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

10 authors.

André Pfob *Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany. andre.pfob@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID 0000-0001-6140-9895
Christoph Hillen *Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Katharina Seitz *University Hospital Erlangen, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Sebastian Griewing *Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Marburg, Philipps-University Marburg, Baldingerstraße, 35043, Marburg, Germany.
Sven BeckerDepartment of Gynecology, University Hospital, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Christian BayerWMC HEALTHCARE GmbH, München, Germany.
Uwe WagnerDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Marburg, Philipps-University Marburg, Baldingerstraße, 35043, Marburg, Germany.
Peter FaschingUniversity Hospital Erlangen, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Markus WallwienerDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Kommission Digitale Medizin, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Gebursthilfe (DGGG)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDigitalization plays a critical role and is beginning to impact every part of the patient journey, from drug discovery and data collection to treatment and patient-reported outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the status quo and future directions of digital medicine in the specialty of gynecology and obstetrics in Germany.

methodsAn anonymous questionnaire was distributed via the German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics newsletter in December 2022. The questionnaire covered the domains baseline demographic information, telemedicine, digital health applications (DIGAs), and future expectations.

resultsIn all, 91 participants completed the survey. Median age was 34 years; 67.4% (60 of 89) were female and 32.6% (29 of 89) were male. About 10% (9 of 88) have prescribed DIGAs to date and 14% (12 of 86) offer telemedical appointments. Among those who do not use digital medicine, very few plan to do so in the near future. Reasons include missing software interfaces, lack of time to try out new things, lack of knowledge, lack of monetary compensation (66.3%), and employee concerns. A majority agreed that digitalization will help to save time and improve patient care and that intelligent algorithms will aid clinicians in providing patient care to women.

conclusionsThe status quo and future directions of digital medicine in gynecology and obstetrics in Germany are characterized by contradicting expectations regarding the benefits of digital medicine and its actual implementation in clinical routine. This represents an important call to action to meet the requirements of modern patient care.

Indexed as

GynecologyObstetricsTelemedicineAdultFemaleGermanyHumansMalePregnancySurveys and QuestionnairesArtificial intelligenceDigital healtheHealthGynecology and obstetricsImplementation

Identifiers

PMID37755531
PMCPMC10769997

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.