ReviewDigital health
Aligning practitioner's perception: Empowering MAST framework for evaluating telemedicine services.
Review in Digital health. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Telemedicine is a digital substitute for in-person healthcare service delivery systems that has gained popularity amid the global COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of this study was to evaluate telemedicine compatibility from the perspective of healthcare practitioners to enhance the effectiveness and spectrum of the Model for Assessment of Telemedicine. Method: Primary and Secondary Healthcare and King Edward Medical University extended their respective telemedicine services in 2020 where 24,516 patients were benefited from the telemedicine services provided by 1273 doctors from different specializations. A cross-sectional survey via online questionnaire was conducted among purposively sampled 248 healthcare practitioners designated at telemedicine portals in the public sector; further analysed by descriptive analysis and Monte Carlo Feature Selection. Results: Healthcare practitioner perception was analysed explicitly and found significant in addition to the existing domains under multidisciplinary assessment in the Model for Assessment of Telemedicine model. The variables of subdomains integration with healthcare system, patient facilitation, technology ease, capacity building, ethical integrity, outcome assessment and communication gap under proposed healthcare practitioner perception domain were found interdependent. The variables of patient satisfaction, resource preservation, healthcare practitioner satisfaction, digital connectivity, user-friendliness, and patient safety were found to be of higher importance (RI values). However, the compatibility of telemedicine with the healthcare system was also influenced by interdependencies (RI plot) and multifaceted interactions of variables derived from the healthcare practitioner perception. Conclusion: The variables of healthcare practitioner perception were exhibiting various weightages of importance and interdependencies in determining the compatibility of telemedicine within the healthcare system and recommended to be considered in the Model for Assessment of Telemedicine framework.
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.