ArticlePediatric neurology2024
Clinician Stakeholder Experience With Telemedicine Consults to Assess Neonatal Encephalopathy in a Rural State.
Article in Pediatric neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSerial neonatal encephalopathy (NE) examinations are difficult to perform in rural community hospitals as on-site experts are not readily available. We implemented a synchronous, acute care model of teleconsultation-the Maine Neonatal Encephalopathy Teleconsultation program (Maine NET)-to provide remote, joint assessment of NE by pediatric neurology and neonatology at nine community hospitals and one tertiary care center. We performed a qualitative study to interview clinicians about their experience of this program.
methodsFrom April 2018 to October 2022, we employed a semistructured interview format with 16 clinicians representing all participating hospitals. We utilized deductive analysis to assign a set of predefined codes to the transcribed interviews.
resultsThematic analysis supported the anticipated benefits of Maine NET, demonstrating that clinicians felt resource utilization, collaborative decision making, communication, and continuity of care were improved. Clinicians overwhelmingly supported the program: "This program has truly saved babies' lives and future function. I have not met any parents through this journey, who aren't incredibly grateful for the care that is provided" and emphasized the benefit of collaboration between all care team members. Teleconsultation was felt to be "more than adequate to [assess] NE." Connectivity issues were cited as a limitation.
conclusionsMaine NET has positively impacted care delivery for newborns with clinical concerns for NE. Additionally, the program has improved resource allocation, collaborative decision making, communication, and equity of care. Addressing technological challenges will be vital to the success and sustainability of the planned Maine NET expansion.
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.