ArticleAsian spine journal2025
To Zoom or not to Zoom? A retrospective comparative study to assess the validity of video versus face-to-face consultations and examinations for diagnosing lower back pain in Wales.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2025. 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.
- Impact of a History of COVID-19 Infection on Postoperative Complications in Spinal Surgery: A Nationwide Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designA retrospective comparative study. PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of examination findings and diagnoses established after initial spinal consultations for low back pain conducted virtually in comparison with face-to-face (F2F) consultations. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic required a shift from F2F to virtual consultations in healthcare, with documented benefits such as reduced costs, CO2 emissions, and time. However, the diagnostic accuracy of telemedicine for conditions requiring physical examinations, such as low back pain, remains underexplored. Although studies have highlighted the feasibility and high satisfaction of virtual spinal assessments, they have not thoroughly investigated their diagnostic accuracy.
methodsThis study included 154 new patients with degenerative lumbar spine problems who were assessed via virtual consultations (VCs) (n=77) or F2F (n=77) by a single orthopedic spinal surgeon between May 2020 and January 2021. Patients were matched by age and sex, and examinations followed the "telemedicine musculoskeletal examination" protocol by the Mayo Clinic. Diagnostic changes from initial to definitive diagnoses were recorded and compared between the two groups.
resultsThe diagnostic accuracy of VCs was comparable with that of F2F examinations, with no significant difference in the rate of diagnostic changes between the groups (p=0.814 for any change; p=0.405 for more significant changes). Motor deficits were the only examination component with significant false-positive rates in the VC group (p=0.023).
conclusionsThe study findings indicate that the initial spinal VCs and examinations are effective, safe, and beneficial in the evaluation of low back pain, providing the same diagnostic accuracy as initial F2F consultations. All erroneous motor deficit findings were false positive, which means that no serious pathology was missed during the initial VC evaluation. Future research should focus on refining virtual examination techniques, particularly for assessing motor deficits.
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.