ArticlemHealth2025
Telemedicine adoption in Ecuador: an assessment of physician perceptions and knowledge towards its benefits and limitations.
Article in mHealth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Telemedicine (TM) is a growing field with the potential to improve healthcare delivery; however, it is important for proper implementation to understand how physicians perceive the benefits and limitations related to their use. With this study, our aim is to assess the perceptions and knowledge of TM among a sample of Ecuadorian healthcare providers. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey-based study where participants answered a 12-item survey assessing their knowledge and perceptions towards TM. Demographic variables were analyzed applying descriptive statistics, and a chi-square goodness-of-fit test was used to assess the observed frequencies of each of the survey's queries. Multiple linear regression was performed to evaluate predictors of overall attitude regarding TM. Results: In total, 382 participants completed the survey with an average age of 51.3 years [standard deviation (SD) 11.4]. Around half of the participants expressed low to very low familiarity with TM technology [χ Conclusions: In this study, we identified a significant proportion of physicians who reported limited familiarity with TM, despite recognizing its potential benefits for patient care. Concerns regarding data confidentiality breaches and the risk of malpractice were highlighted as primary issues necessitating a framework to mitigate these risks. Future research is required to address the perceived technological barriers to ensure the safe and efficient implementation of TM in healthcare settings.
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.