ReviewJAMIA open2025
An approach to evaluating the impact of virtual specialty care: the Veterans Health Administration's clinical resource hub as case study.
Review in JAMIA open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence and Correlates of Social Risks and Receipt of Resources Among Rural and Urban Veterans.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2026Article
- A Longitudinal Evaluation of a Novel Short-Term Staffing and Telehealth Program: A Retrospective Observational Study.Journal of primary care & community healthObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Telemedicine for specialty medical care is evolving from a COVID-19 pandemic-era requirement to an option for patients and clinicians alike, requiring evidence to guide optimal use of virtual specialty care. Heterogeneity across medical specialties complicates this evidence generation. To address this gap in the literature, we present an approach to evaluation of telehealth across specialties with the potential to generate findings generalizable across specialties and health systems. Materials and Methods: We describe an approach to evaluation of virtual specialty care that balances widely generalizable metrics, such as patient and clinician satisfaction and avoided travel or cost, and those that are specialty-specific. We use the Veterans Health Administration (VA)'s Clinical Resource Hub program to illustrate potential applications of this approach. Results: Clinical Resource Hub clinics leverage a hub-and-spoke model to deliver virtual care across many specialties, compensating for staffing shortages and expanding access to more specialized services not available at every VA site. Use cases for these clinics span the spectrum of short-term, episodic care to long-term substitution for a usual source of specialty care and offer opportunities to apply a range of evaluation metrics that generalize across telehealth use cases. Discussion: Clinical Resource Hub clinics provide a variety of examples for this approach, demonstrating a path forward for virtual specialty care evaluation. Conclusion: As the Clinical Resource Hub case illustrates, combining universal and specialty- or use case-specific metrics has the potential to build the evidence base for virtual specialty care.
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.