ArticleBMJ open2024
Impact of virtual consultations on quality of care in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and narrative synthesis protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 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.
- The impact of remote care on the quality of care of pregnant women with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAround 463 million people globally have diabetes, of which over 90% have type 2 diabetes (T2D). Projections indicate an expected increase to 700 million by 2045. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated digital health uptake, establishing virtual consultations as a feasible alternative to traditional in-person care. Despite promising preliminary evidence, a comprehensive review is needed to fully assess the impact of virtual consultations on diabetes care. This review aims to systematically evaluate the impact of remote consultations on the quality of care provided to persons with T2D, by mapping impacts against the six quality domains outlined by the National Academy of Medicine (NAM) (ie, patient-centeredness, effectiveness, efficiency, timeliness, equity and safety). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: PubMed/MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), COCHRANE Library, EMBASE (Excerpta Medica Database), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and Web of Science will be searched for studies published between 2010 and 2024. Primary outcomes will include any quality measures pertaining to the NAM domains for adult patients accessing virtual consultations. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool will be used to assess the quality of the randomised studies, and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions will be used for non-randomised studies. The findings will be summarised as a narrative synthesis. This systematic review protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews on 15 November 2023 (registration number: CRD42023474219). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will not include primary data and therefore does not require ethical approval. This protocol complies with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines. Findings will be disseminated as academic publications and conference presentations and summarised into patient-led lay summaries.
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.