Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39734584›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of nursing studies advances2025

Telehealth use in the well-child health setting. A systematic review of acceptability and effectiveness for families and practitioners.

Kim Howland, Kristina Edvardsson, Helen Lees, Leesa Hooker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of nursing studies advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors.

Kim HowlandJudith Lumley Centre, School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Kristina EdvardssonJudith Lumley Centre, School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Helen LeesJudith Lumley Centre, School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Leesa HookerJudith Lumley Centre, School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Universal well-child health nursing services in high-resource countries promote the health and well-being of children and families while preventing health inequities. The COVID-19 pandemic and technological advancements have led to the increased use of telehealth in this field. To enhance policies and practices, it's important to understand the acceptability and effectiveness of telehealth, as well as the barriers and enablers to its implementation, and to determine when its use is appropriate and safe. Objective: To explore the global evidence on the use of telehealth in well-child health settings within high-income countries. Focussing on the effectiveness and acceptability of telehealth, along with the factors affecting its implementation and the considerations for safety from the perspectives of both providers and families. Design: A mixed methods systematic review. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. The inclusion criteria for the review included: primary research papers written in English, conducted in high-income countries, focused on telehealth in the well-child health setting, and involving children under six years of age. The search, which was completed in July 2023, systematically explored the CINAHL, ProQuest Central, PubMed, and Web of Science bibliographic databases. Studies were critically appraised for quality, and relevant data extracted. A convergent segregated approach was employed to synthesise both quantitative and qualitative data, which is presented in a narrative format. Results: A total of 4,354 records were identified and screened, and 169 full-text papers were assessed for eligibility, resulting in 20 papers for inclusion. Telehealth acceptability among families was reported in 13 of the 20 studies reviewed, with participants expressing high satisfaction regarding its use as a complement to standard care. Only three studies examined practitioners' acceptance, revealing mixed responses. Effectiveness was observed in 15 studies, with no significant differences found between the control and telehealth groups, suggesting that telehealth may achieve outcomes like those of standard care. Four studies identified both enablers and barriers to the implementation of telehealth, though none addressed concerns regarding safety and appropriateness. Conclusions: Telehealth shows promise for well-child health services, but there is limited evidence of its effectiveness and safety. The COVID-19 pandemic increased its use, yet risks need further exploration. To validate telehealth in this field, we must identify effective applications, tackle implementation barriers, and ensure client safety. Additional research is essential for developing evidence-based policies for future practices.

Indexed as

Child HealthCommunity Health CentresCommunity Health NursingMaternal-Child Health CentresRemote ConsultationRural HealthTelemedicineTelephoneVideoconferencing

Identifiers

PMID39734584
PMCPMC11681896

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.