Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40835383›Full record

ArticleOnline journal of public health informatics2025

Remote Consultations in England During COVID-19: Challenges in Data Quality, Linkage, and Research Validity.

Liliana Hidalgo-Padilla, Massar Dabbous, Kristoffer Halvorsrud, Thomas Beaney, Gideon Gideon, Eoin Gogarty, Geva Greenfield, Benedict Hayhoe, Gabriele Kerr, Rosalind Raine and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Online journal of public health informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Liliana Hidalgo-Padilla *Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, 16 De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, United Kingdom, 44 020 7848 0002.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8451-7215
Massar Dabbous *Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, 16 De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, United Kingdom, 44 020 7848 0002.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-8955-8804
Kristoffer HalvorsrudDepartment of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8813-0939
Thomas BeaneyDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9709-7264
Gideon GideonInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, 16 De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, United Kingdom, 44 020 7848 0002.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-8162-1746
Eoin GogartyInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, 16 De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, United Kingdom, 44 020 7848 0002.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4137-4220
Geva GreenfieldDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9779-2486
Benedict HayhoeDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2645-6191
Gabriele KerrDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3170-3211
Rosalind RaineDepartment of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0904-749X
Nirandeep RehillDepartment of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4179-0996
Robert StewartInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, 16 De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, United Kingdom, 44 020 7848 0002.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4435-6397
Fiona GaughranInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, 16 De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, United Kingdom, 44 020 7848 0002.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7414-5569
Mariana Pinto da CostaInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, 16 De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, United Kingdom, 44 020 7848 0002.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5966-5723

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Unlabelled: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of remote consultations across health care, requiring rapid adjustments in service delivery. Consequently, there is an urgent need to understand the impact of remote consultations on health pathways. This viewpoint paper explores key challenges in data sources in England that hinder research on the impact of remote consultations on health outcomes. Based on our experience conducting research on this topic, we present variations in observational study findings and their validity, considering differences in population characteristics and data sources. We provide recommendations to enhance data quality for future research, including improvements in data recording platforms and strengthened structures for linking primary and secondary care electronic health records.

Indexed as

COVID-19data qualitydata sourcesEHRelectronic health recordEnglandremote consultationremote consultationsremote monitoringsecondary caretelecaretelehealthtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID40835383
PMCPMC12367347

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.