Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39273713›Full record

ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024

A Systematic Review of Online Medical Consultation Research.

Tian Shen, Yu Li, Xi Chen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Tian ShenSchool of International Education, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing 210023, China.
Yu LiBusiness School, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, China.
Xi ChenBusiness School, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2634-8641

Funding

Jiangsu Provincial Social Science Fund Key Project 20GLA007National Social Science Fund Project 21BGL223
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Online medical consultation is a form of medical service that facilitates interactions between patients and doctors online, offering significant utility and value. This review aims to retrieve, screen, and analyze articles related to online medical consultations, formulating a theoretical framework and proposing future research directions. According to PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in Web of Science, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, PubMed, and Scopus, retrieving a total of 4072 English records on 16 December 2023. After rigorous screening, 75 articles were included in this review. Among these, 8 articles focused on patients utilizing online medical consultation platforms, 5 on doctors participating in online medical platforms, 18 on patients' choice of doctors, 12 on doctors providing services, 7 on online reviews of patients, 14 on service quality for patients, 8 on rewards to doctors, and 11 on the spillover effect between online and offline services. These themes comprise the theoretical framework of the starting point, process, and outcomes of the online medical consultation system, providing a comprehensive understanding of the field and a foundation for future research.

Indexed as

doctorsonline medical consultationonline medical platformpatientssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID39273713
PMCPMC11394778

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.