Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40918048›Full record

ArticleTelemedicine reports2025

Systematic Review of Surveys Used to Evaluate Patient and Provider Perspectives on Teleophthalmology.

Teresa E Fowler, Gianluca De Leo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Telemedicine reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Teresa E FowlerDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9582-0914
Gianluca De LeoSchool of Public Health, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6836-8360

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Telemedicine has become an important mechanism for delivering health care in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. While some medical subspecialties were able to rapidly integrate telecare into their workflow, ophthalmology is one field in which telemedicine has not been as widely adopted. In this systematic review, we analyze published studies assessing patient and provider viewpoints on telemedicine for eye care. Our aim is to understand how adoption of teleophthalmology is being studied and whether definitive conclusions regarding patient and provider perspectives on telecare can be drawn from published literature. Methods: We performed a systematic PubMed search for studies utilizing surveys to assess patient and provider perspectives regarding remote eye care. Articles were excluded if they were irrelevant to teleophthalmology, did not assess patient or eye care provider perspectives regarding teleophthalmology, assessed specific platforms or aspects of eye care, were reviews without primary data, or if the survey used was not available. The questionnaires from the included articles were analyzed for validation status, subspecialty, question wording, and response format. Results: The PubMed search returned 92 articles, 22 of which were included in the final dataset after exclusions. Only four studies utilized externally validated questionnaires, although several additional studies were based on validated items. Survey length, wording, and response formatting varied across the studies. These 22 studies contained responses from 3,796 patients and 2,388 eye care professionals, but the lack of standardization between the surveys makes high power conclusions impossible. Discussion: The results of this review demonstrate a need to develop a standardized and validated survey instrument specifically for assessing teleophthalmology to identify barriers to widespread implementation.

Indexed as

ophthalmologysurveytelemedicineteleophthalmologyvalidation

Identifiers

PMID40918048
PMCPMC12411898

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.