Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38188860›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Drivers and barriers of patients' acceptance of video consultation in cancer care.

Angelina Nurtsch, Martin Teufel, Lisa Maria Jahre, André Esber, Raya Rausch, Mitra Tewes, Christoph Schöbel, Stefan Palm, Martin Schuler, Dirk Schadendorf and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
17.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Patient acceptance of video consultations in cardiology.European heart journal. Digital health · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. 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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Angelina NurtschClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Martin TeufelClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Lisa Maria JahreClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
André EsberClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Raya RauschClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Mitra TewesWest German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Christoph SchöbelFaculty of Sleep Medicine and Telemedicine, West German Lung Center, University Medicine Essen - Ruhrlandklinik, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Stefan PalmWest German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Martin SchulerWest German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Dirk SchadendorfWest German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Eva-Maria SkodaClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Alexander BäuerleClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1488-8592
University of Duisburg-Essen · DERuhrlandklinik · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Due to digitization in the medical sector, many healthcare interactions are switched to online services. This study assessed the acceptance of video consultations (VCs) in cancer care, and determined drivers and barriers of acceptance. Methods: A cross-sectional online-based survey study was conducted in Germany from February 2022 to February 2023. Recruitment took place at oncology outpatient clinics, general practitioners, oncology practices and via cancer-related social media channels. Inclusion criteria were a cancer diagnosis, cancer treatment and internet access. Sociodemographic, medical data, eHealth-related data were acquired via an online assessment. The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model was used to determine the acceptance of VC and its predictors. Results: Of Conclusions: Patients' acceptance of VC in cancer care is high. Drivers and barriers to acceptance identified should be considered for personalized applications. Considering the growing demand for cancer care establishing digital healthcare solutions is justified.

Indexed as

remote consultationTelemedicineteleoncologyUTAUTvideoconferencing

Identifiers

PMID38188860
PMCPMC10768612
OpenAlexW4390586317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.