SynthesisSexually transmitted infections2026
Remote consultations in sexual and reproductive health services: a systematic review of evidence on effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, experiences, access and equity.
Synthesis in Sexually transmitted infections, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- What guidance exists to support remote consultations in sexual and reproductive health services? A review of the policy and practice literature.Sexually transmitted infections · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTimely access to sexual health screening and contraception is an important public health issue. Substantial funding reductions for sexual and reproductive health services (SRHS) and COVID-19 have led to significant changes in service delivery, including the rapid introduction of remote consultations, as a substitute for in-person contact. There is limited evidence relating to the barriers to remote consultations and how these may impact sexual health outcomes and wider health inequalities. This study synthesises existing evidence on remote consultations to examine effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, experiences, access and equity.
methodsEighteen electronic databases were systematically searched to locate relevant studies published from OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries after 2010. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to evaluate the quality of the studies.
resultsOut of 8690 studies identified, 48 met the inclusion criteria. The included studies were heterogeneous and covered a range of topics; however, few focused on health inequalities and remote consultations, with satisfaction and quality of care being the most common outcome measures. Many of the studies were completed post-2020 in response to COVID-19 and were of medium to low quality. Access to technology and communication challenges were found to impact inequality when accessing SRHS via remote consultations, although they enhance convenience for service users and service providers.
conclusionsOverall, the review shows that a range of studies have investigated remote consultations in SRHS, but there remains limited evidence on the impact on health inequalities and sexual health outcomes. The surge in post-2020 research, spurred by COVID-19, indicates the necessity for further high-quality research into equitable SRHS delivery in the post-COVID era, particularly in addressing technological and communication barriers. There is a need to further optimise access and the delivery of remote consultations in SRHS, considering the needs of service users, and minimising inequality (observed differences) and inequity (unfair differences).CRD42023397288.
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.