ArticleBMC health services research2025
Challenges for remote patient monitoring programs in rural and regional areas: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Digital and Remote Health for Older Adults in Rural or Underserved Settings: Systematic Review of Clinical, Behavioral, and Implementation Outcomes.JMIR aging · 2026Pooled it
- Closing the rural diabetes research gap: a case for coordinated international collaboration.Global health action · 2026Article
- Nurses' Roles, Challenges, and Reported Outcomes in Rural and Remote Healthcare: A JBI-Aligned Scoping Review (PRISMA-ScR).Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Digital Transformation of Rural, Regional, and Remote Australian Hospitals: A Pragmatic Strategy for Introducing AI.The Australian journal of rural health · 2026Article
- Remote Patient Monitoring and the Need for a New Care Model: A Narrative Review of Implementation Challenges.Cureus · 2026Review
- Socially Assistive RobotJournal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The process of self-care in patients with heart failure after nurse-assisted remote patient monitoring: A qualitative longitudinal approach.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2025Article
- Determinants of feasibility, acceptability and reach of mobile phone delivery of an Adolescent Transition Package (ATP) supporting the transition of youth living with HIV to adult HIV care in Kenya during the COVID-19 pandemic.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Leveraging lived experience in rural settings: a systematic review protocol of digital healthcare environment.BMJ open · 2025Article
- An Ontology-Based Expert System Approach for Hearing Aid Fitting in a Chaotic Environment.Audiology research · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccess to healthcare significantly influences health outcomes, and rural, regional and remote populations face greater challenges in accessing healthcare than urban populations. Digital health tools, such as remote patient monitoring (RPM), have significant potential to address these healthcare challenges, yet there is little research on the facilitators and barriers of RPM in these regions.
aimThis study aims to identify and understand the facilitators and barriers healthcare staff face implementing RPM in rural and regional Australia, with focus on challenges that arose after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
methodsSemi-structured focus groups were conducted with healthcare professionals from publicly funded health services in western rural and regional Victoria, Australia. An open-ended interview guide based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used to identify key themes and strategies for effective RPM implementation. The analysis considered barriers and facilitators at micro, meso, and macro levels.
resultsSeveral barriers to RPM implementation were identified across different levels: (1) Micro-Level Factors, such as perceived low digital literacy and language barriers among individuals; (2) Meso-Level Factors, including disparities in IT infrastructure and device availability, limited training opportunities, and the need for enhanced governance within healthcare settings; and (3) Macro-Level Factors, encompassing evolving funding models and the reliability of service providers. Despite these challenges, participants acknowledged potential benefits such as improved technological interoperability, enhanced community engagement, and a data-driven approach to quality improvement. Importantly, a flexible, tailored RPM approach to accommodate specific rural and regional needs was deemed valuable.
conclusionEffective RPM deployment in rural and regional areas is viewed by health professionals as crucial for bridging healthcare divides. However, if strategies developed for urban settings are not recalibrated to address rural challenges, the risk of RPM failure may escalate. Future initiatives must prioritize region-specific strategies and policy reforms aimed at ensuring equitable digital infrastructure and financial resource allocation to enhance healthcare access in rural and regional settings. This approach may ensure that RPM solutions are both adaptable and effective, tailored to the unique needs of each community.
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.