ArticleHealthcare informatics research2024
Technology and Access to Healthcare with Different Scheduling Systems: A Scoping Review.
Article in Healthcare informatics research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- An electronic health record-based strategy to increase PrEP decision-making among cisgender women in primary care: results of a randomized pilot study.BMC health services research · 2025Trial
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesOnline consultation scheduling is increasingly common in health services across various countries. This paper reviews articles published in the past five years and reflects on the risks and benefits of this practice, linking it to a recent Portuguese pilot project.
methodsA search for articles from Web of Science and Scopus published since 2018 was conducted using the terms "online scheduling," "online booking," and "consultations." This search was completed in the last week of 2023.
resultsOut of 64 articles retrieved, 26 were relevant to the topic. These articles were reviewed, and their main findings, along with those from other relevant sources, were discussed.
conclusionsSeveral limitations of online consultations were identified, encompassing ethical, clinical, and economic aspects. While these consultations tend to be less expensive, their accessibility varies based on factors such as the users' age, whether they reside in rural or urban areas, and the technological capabilities of different countries, indicating that access disparities may continue to widen. Confidentiality concerns also arise, varying by medical specialty, along with issues related to payment. Overall, however, both users and health professionals view the advent of online consultation booking positively. In conclusion, despite the risks identified, online consultation booking has the potential to enhance user access to health services, provided that usage limitations and technological disparities are addressed. Research production has not kept pace with rapid technological advancements.
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.