Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40008381›Full record

ReviewPCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences2025

Patients' and providers' evaluations of telepsychiatry and future directions: A literature review of mixed research methods.

Ikuko Natsukari, Norio Ozaki

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Review
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

2 authors.

Ikuko NatsukariDepartment of Psychiatry Yakitsubeno-Michi Clinic Shizuoka Japan.ORCID 0009-0005-4226-2011
Norio OzakiPathophysiology of Mental Disorders, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine Nagoya Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Regarding the use of telemedicine after the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been little consideration of the patient's perspective. In this review, we aimed to examine the future direction of telemedicine by reviewing the literature that evaluated telemedicine from a patient-centered perspective and providers' perspective using a mixed research method. A search of studies containing keywords related to "telemedicine," "patient satisfaction," and "patient perspective" was conducted using MEDLINE from January 2014 to August 2024. The study was conducted using a mixed research method. Eleven articles were extracted, including studies that used combined evaluation by healthcare providers. The method of integration of quantitative and qualitative studies included eight convergent designs and three explanatory sequential designs. In quantitative surveys, patients' evaluations of telepsychiatry were generally favorable, with the main advantages being convenience and access. In qualitative surveys, heterogeneity in results was observed depending on patients' conditions and social factors, such as the presence of chronic diseases and stigma, while difficulties in symptom assessment were cited by healthcare providers. The continuation of telepsychiatry after a pandemic requires collecting detailed opinions of patients using mixed research methods, qualitative surveys, and evaluation and improvement through controlled studies and studies using large, diverse samples.

Indexed as

mixed research methodspatient experiencepatient satisfactionstigmatelepsychiatry

Identifiers

PMID40008381
PMCPMC11850290

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.