ReviewBioMed research international2024
A Bibliometric Analysis of Telephone Triage Research to 2021 Using VOSviewer.
Review in BioMed research international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Telephone triage services are becoming increasingly commonplace in modern healthcare. Despite this widespread adoption, health researchers and practitioners seeking to understand evidence-based best practice face several challenges. Firstly, the few systematic reviews available yield small sample sizes, suggesting a small amount of research. Secondly, the rapid pace of development of telephone triage technologies means that there may be temporal validity issues with the available research, given some of this research is relatively old. Thirdly, researchers use different terminologies to describe telephone triage, meaning evidence may be more difficult to find than if consistent terminology was used. This bibliometric analysis therefore is aimed at providing a macroscopic overview of telephone triage, to understand the scale and scope of the available evidence (i.e., where, when, and by whom research is conducted), for interested researchers and practitioners. Additionally, it is aimed at quantifying the prevalence of terms used to describe telephone triage, to recommend consistent terminology for future use, and to improve accessibility of research. To address these aims, literature searches using three different key terms: "telephone triage," "remote triage," and "teletriage" were conducted in Scopus and PubMed. Corresponding bibliometric data was visualised and analysed using VOSviewer. This bibliometric review identified 784 papers since the term "telephone triage" first appears in 1980, confirming a paucity of literature in the field. An overview of telephone triage research up to 2021 is provided, which should serve as a useful foundation for future research and application of evidence-based practice. Gaps in telephone triage research are identified, and the use of consistent terminology is encouraged, with the aim of supporting telephone triage researchers in determining research priorities and improving the impact of future studies.
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.