Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38628988›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

Acceptability and Satisfaction of Patients and Providers With Telemedicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review.

Shazina Saeed, Manmohan Singhal, Karuna N Kaur, Mohd Shannawaz, Arunima Koul, Kanika Arora, Bhavna Kumar, Neeraj Kumar Sethiya, Shamimul Hasan

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Digital health delivery in respiratory medicine: adjunct, replacement or cause for division?European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024
    Review
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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Shazina SaeedAmity Institute of Public Health & Hospital Administration, Amity University, Noida, IND.
Manmohan SinghalSchool of Pharmaceuticals and Population Health Informatics, DIT University, Dehradun, IND.
Karuna N KaurAmity Institute of Public Health & Hospital Administration, Amity University, Noida, IND.
Mohd ShannawazAmity Institute of Public Health & Hospital Administration, Amity University, Noida, IND.
Arunima KoulAmity Institute of Public Health & Hospital Administration, Amity University, Noida, IND.
Kanika AroraAmity Institute of Public Health & Hospital Administration, Amity University, Noida, IND.
Bhavna KumarSchool of Pharmaceuticals and Population Health Informatics, DIT University, Dehradun, IND.
Neeraj Kumar SethiyaSchool of Pharmaceuticals and Population Health Informatics, DIT University, Dehradun, IND.
Shamimul HasanOral Medicine and Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, IND.
Amity University · AEAmity University · INDehradun Institute of Technology University · INJamia Millia Islamia · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

COVID-19, also known as coronavirus disease 2019, is an extremely contagious viral sickness caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). After the first cases of this primarily respiratory viral illness were recorded in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, in late December 2019, SARS-CoV-2 rapidly disseminated across the globe. Consequently, on March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared it a global pandemic. The rapid spread of the COVID-19 virus, coupled with subsequent lockdowns and social distancing measures, profoundly disrupted traditional healthcare delivery systems. Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine emerged as a pivotal solution for delivering healthcare services while minimizing exposure to the virus. This study aims to assess patient and provider satisfaction with telemedicine during this unprecedented period. A systematic literature search was conducted on PubMed and Google Scholar using specific MeSH terms and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Literature Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to summarize patient and provider satisfaction concerning telemedicine using all the facts, evidence, and published literature. The analysis showed that although providers were generally satisfied with telemedicine, they were less satisfied than patients due to technical issues and difficulties transmitting documents. Patients reported high satisfaction with telemedicine, citing convenience and cost savings as major benefits. However, a lack of provider compensation was identified as a potential barrier to adoption. Most providers believed that telemedicine was only necessary in emergencies while a few recognized its potential for routine care. The study concludes that telemedicine has the potential to improve healthcare access and efficiency, but more research is needed to address technical and reimbursement issues and to determine the appropriate scope of telemedicine use. Overall, the findings of this study can inform future healthcare policies and regulations to ensure that telemedicine is used effectively and to the satisfaction of both patients and providers.

Indexed as

covid-19covid-19 pandemicpatient’s satisfactionprovider satisfactiontelemedicine (tm)

Identifiers

PMID38628988
PMCPMC11019470
OpenAlexW4392893867

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.