ArticleBMJ open2025
What are the ethical issues related to telerehabilitation? A critical interpretive synthesis protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTelerehabilitation (also known as virtual rehabilitation) refers to the use of telecommunication technologies to deliver remote rehabilitation services synchronously or asynchronously to patients. Systematic reviews seem to validate the efficacy and efficiency of telerehabilitation services for diverse patient conditions while offering in addition potential cost savings in healthcare. However, integrating telerehabilitation into clinical settings raises several ethical issues, including the risk of exacerbating existing health inequities in the provision of care. Despite the apparent scarcity of the literature addressing ethical issues related to telerehabilitation, some of these fundamental concerns have already been discussed in health ethics publications. The main objectives of this study are therefore to first scrutinise what has been published to date and second to critically examine the way in which these dimensions have been conceptualised, especially the philosophical and ethical conceptions on which they are based. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: To meet these objectives, we will conduct a Critical Interpretive Synthesis (CIS). By using an iterative and interactive process, a CIS aims to critically examine the literature and develop a theoretical understanding grounded in review studies. As per the steps described by Dixon-Woods, we will start by conducting a systematic search of the literature within five selected databases: CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science and PsycINFO. The search strategy will be based on two main concepts: (1) telerehabilitation and (2) ethics. This systematic search will be completed by other research strategies: searching the list of references of selected articles and contacting experts within and outside our team's expertise. Search results will be imported within the Covidence software to be assessed for relevance. We will include all empirical and non-empirical articles that specifically investigate or discuss the ethical dimensions of telerehabilitation. Only studies published in English and French will be included. The search and selection of the articles will be carried out interactively and inductively throughout the stages of extraction and development of a theoretical understanding of the data to fill emerging conceptual gaps. The analysis and critical synthesis will be led by the first author but carried out by our multidisciplinary research team. This study, through its critical dimension, has the potential to provide a more comprehensive overview of the many ethical issues surrounding telerehabilitation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review does not require ethical approval. We aim to publish the results in a peer-reviewed journal and do presentations at local, national and/or international research meetings and workshops for all stakeholders.
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.