ArticleJournal of neurology2024
Patient acceptance of teleneurology across neurologic conditions.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Implementation of a stroke/TIA e-consult increases outpatient stroke Teleneurology consults placed in VHA compared to community care.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- REMOTE-Neuro: co-produced recommendations to optimise remote neurology.BMJ neurology open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPatient acceptability with outpatient teleneurology has been reported within specific conditions, but less is known about acceptability across neurologic conditions. The study objective was to compare the acceptability of teleneurology between patients with various neurological conditions and determine what other factors influence acceptability.
methodsThis was a prospective study of Veterans who completed new outpatient teleneurology visits with the Department of Veterans Affairs National Teleneurology Program. Visits were conducted via video to home or video to the outpatient clinic. Patient acceptability was assessed via telephone interview two weeks post-visit. Acceptability was a summed score (3-21) of three 7-point Likert questions (higher = more acceptable). Clinical diagnosis categories were based on the neurologists' ICD10 diagnosis code. Acceptability score was modeled using a censored Tobit model controlling for demographics, type of tele-visit, medical comorbidity, and ICD10 category.
resultsIn FY 2021, 277 of 637 (43.5%) patients completed an interview with analyzable acceptability data. Of these 277, 70 (25.3%) had codes indicating headache, 46 (16.6%) movement disorder, 45 (16.2%) general symptoms, and 116 (41.9%) for all other categories. Mean patient acceptability was 18.3 (SD 3.2). There was no significant difference in scores between these groups. The only factor independently related to acceptability was medical comorbidity, with higher comorbidity associated with higher acceptability scores. DISCUSSION: Patients find their outpatient teleneurology experience highly acceptable independent of neurologic condition. Those with more comorbidity report higher acceptability. Use of teleneurology may be useful and acceptable across many outpatient neurologic conditions including for more medically complex patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.