Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38879682›Full record

ReviewNPJ digital medicine2024

Effectiveness of telehealth versus in-person care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review.

Elham Hatef, Renee F Wilson, Allen Zhang, Susan M Hannum, Hadi Kharrazi, Stacey A Davis, Iman Foroughmand, Jonathan P Weiner, Karen A Robinson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in NPJ digital medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Variation in Telehealth Use in a National Home Test-to-Treat Program for Acute Respiratory Infections.Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2026
    Observational
  5. Article
  6. Impact of Emerging Technologies on Outpatient Care Quality: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

Elham HatefDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. ehatef1@jhu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2535-8191
Renee F WilsonJohns Hopkins Evidence-based Practice Center, Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Allen ZhangJohns Hopkins Evidence-based Practice Center, Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Susan M HannumDepartment of Health, Behavior, and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Hadi KharraziCenter for Population Health Information Technology, Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Stacey A DavisDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Iman ForoughmandCenter for Population Health Information Technology, Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5051-6257
Jonathan P WeinerCenter for Population Health Information Technology, Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Karen A RobinsonDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1021-7820

Funding

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) 75Q80120D00003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this systematic review, we compared the effectiveness of telehealth with in-person care during the pandemic using PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from March 2020 to April 2023. We included English-language, U.S.-healthcare relevant studies comparing telehealth with in-person care conducted after the onset of the pandemic. Two reviewers independently screened search results, serially extracted data, and independently assessed the risk of bias and strength of evidence. We identified 77 studies, the majority of which (47, 61%) were judged to have a serious or high risk of bias. Differences, if any, in healthcare utilization and clinical outcomes between in-person and telehealth care were generally small and/or not clinically meaningful and varied across the type of outcome and clinical area. For process outcomes, there was a mostly lower rate of missed visits and changes in therapy/medication and higher rates of therapy/medication adherence among patients receiving an initial telehealth visit compared with those receiving in-person care. However, the rates of up-to-date labs/paraclinical assessment were also lower among patients receiving an initial telehealth visit compared with those receiving in-person care. Most studies lacked a standardized approach to assessing outcomes. While we refrain from making an overall conclusion about the performance of telehealth versus in-person visits the use of telehealth is comparable to in-person care across a variety of outcomes and clinical areas. As we transition through the COVID-19 era, models for integrating telehealth with traditional care become increasingly important, and ongoing evaluations of telehealth will be particularly valuable.

Identifiers

PMID38879682
PMCPMC11180098

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.