Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38866403›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2024

Hammering nails with a screwdriver: how GPs perceive video consultations.

Magnus Repstad Wanderås, Eirik Abildsnes, Elin Thygesen, Santiago Gil Martinez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Primary care video consulting: a view from Northern Europe.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

Magnus Repstad WanderåsFaculty of Health and Sport Sciences, University of Agder, Grimstad, Norway magnushw@uia.no.
Eirik AbildsnesInstitute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Elin ThygesenFaculty of Health and Sport Sciences, University of Agder, Grimstad, Norway.
Santiago Gil MartinezFaculty of Health and Sport Sciences, University of Agder, Grimstad, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly in the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of video consultation (VC) expanded considerably, with GPs indicating high satisfaction with it. However, use of VC declined as lockdown measures were eased.

aimTo explore reasons why VC use has declined in Norwegian general practice since the start of the pandemic by investigating GPs' experiences with VC and their attitudes towards it in a post-pandemic setting. DESIGN &

settingQualitative study using semi-structured interviews with 13 GPs in southern Norway between May 2022 and March 2023.

methodData analysis was conducted by applying the six steps of Braun and Clarke's reflexive thematic analysis.

resultsAlthough the implementation of VCs was unplanned, most participants were able to use this modality without much problem. Several GPs initially envisioned long-term VC use. However, despite certain positives, VCs were largely sidelined in favour of face-to-face and telephone consultations, owing to their practicality and VC's limited usefulness when considering the extra effort required. Nonetheless, GPs recognised ways of using VC that might exploit its strengths, but they highlighted how its sustained use would require them to replace other consultation modalities. They also identified extrinsic factors that might lead to the increased use of VC, including improved VC technology and patient demand.

conclusionAlthough VC is now part of many GPs' consultation toolboxes, its perceived relative lack of usefulness and extra effort compared with other remote consultation modalities mean that most GPs have chosen to abandon it as a routine consultation modality.

Indexed as

COVID-19general practiceremote consultationtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID38866403
PMCPMC11687253

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.