ArticleMultidisciplinary respiratory medicine2025
Perception of the role of Telemedicine in Interstitial Lung Diseases: -Findings from Società Italiana di Pneumologia/ Italian Respiratory -Society (SIP-IRS) survey.
Article in Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine, 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.
- Home-based rehabilitation in interstitial lung disease: picturing the present and drawing the future through a systematic review of the literature.ERJ open research · 2026Review
- Retrospective Observational Study of Nintedanib in Managing Idiopathic and Progressive Pulmonary Fibrosis in Routine Practice.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTelemedicine (TM) is increasingly recognised as a valuable tool in the management of interstitial lung diseases (ILDs). Despite its potential, its integration and application still remain limited. Our work aimed to assess pulmonologists' (physicians and trainees) perception regarding the use of TM in ILDs management.
methodsThis national survey was created and distributed to all pulmonologists, both physicians and trainees, affiliated with Società Italiana di Pneumologia/Italian Respiratory Society (SIP/IRS). Responses were collected anonymously and analysed by using descriptive statistical analysis and the chi-square test. Results: Among 2,906 invited participants, 44 completed the survey. While 95.5% of respondents considered TM useful in ILDs monitoring, only 36% reported its use in clinical practice. Current barriers included reduced availability of TM services (64%) and limited knowledge of TM software (56.8%). Moreover, the majority of participants referred a supportive but not substitutive role of TM in-person consultations, especially in monitoring and patient education. A significant proportion of repliers (over 50%) claimed that it may reduce waiting lists and enhance patient satisfaction (63.6%). However, concerns regarding data security and absence of standardised protocols were also reported. Conclusions: TM is positively perceived by both physicians and trainees' pulmonologist for ILDs follow-up and educational purposes in ILD management. Nevertheless, its integration and application are still hindered by some concerns such as limited infrastructure and digital literacy as well as lack of standardisation of reimbursement protocols and evolving regulatory frameworks. Broader integration of TM will require to address these challenges through investments in technology, structured protocols, and training initiatives.
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.