Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37968639›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2023

Patients' perspectives and preferences toward telemedicine versus in-person visits: a mixed-methods study on 1226 patients.

Khadijeh Moulaei, Abbas Sheikhtaheri, Farhad Fatehi, Mostafa Shanbehzadeh, Kambiz Bahaadinbeigy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Khadijeh MoulaeiDepartment of Health Information Technology, School of Paramedical, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, Iran.
Abbas SheikhtaheriDepartment of Health Information Management, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Farhad FatehiSchool of Business, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Mostafa ShanbehzadehDepartment of Health Information Technology, School of Paramedical, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, Iran.
Kambiz BahaadinbeigyDepartment of Health Information Management and Technology, Medical Informatics Research Center, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran. kambizb321@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite the fact that telemedicine can eliminate geographical and time limitations and offer the possibility of diagnosing, treating, and preventing diseases by sharing reliable information, many individuals still prefer to visit medical centers for in-person consultations. The aim of this study was to determine the level of acceptance of telemedicine compared to in-person visits, identify the perceived advantages of telemedicine over in-person visits, and to explore the reasons why patients choose either of these two types of visits.

methodsWe developed a questionnaire using the rational method. The questionnaire consisted of multiple-choice questions and one open-ended question. A total of 2059 patients were invited to participate in the study. Chi-square tests and descriptive statistics were employed for data analysis. To analyze the data from the open-ended question, we conducted qualitative content analysis using MAXQDA 18.

resultsOut of the 1226 participants who completed the questionnaire, 865 (71%) preferred in-person visits, while 361 (29%) preferred telemedicine. Factors such as education level, specific health conditions, and prior experience with telemedicine influenced the preference for telemedicine. The participants provided a total of 183 different reasons for choosing either telemedicine (108 reasons) or in-person visits (75 reasons). Avoiding infectious diseases, saving cost, and eliminating and overcoming geographical distance barriers were three primary telemedicine benefits. The primary reasons for selecting an in-person visit were: more accurate diagnosis of the disease, more accurate and better examination of the patient by the physician, and more accurate and better treatment of the disease.

conclusionThe results demonstrate that despite the numerous benefits offered by telemedicine, the majority of patients still exhibit a preference for in-person visits. In order to promote broader acceptance of telemedicine, it becomes crucial for telemedicine services to address patient preferences and concerns effectively. Employing effective change management strategies can aid in overcoming resistance and facilitating the widespread adoption of telemedicine within the population.

Indexed as

Data AnalysisTelemedicineHospitalsHumansPandemicsPatient PreferencePatientsPatient preferenceTelehealthTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID37968639
PMCPMC10647122

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.