ArticlePloS one2025
Patient safety risk associated with synchronous telehealth: A scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Article
- Offering in-home video visits: a descriptive national survey of interprofessional clinicians across Veterans Health Administration.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to analyze the risks associated with patient safety in synchronous telehealth.
methodsScoping review with search in 3 databases, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (Medline), via PubMed®, Embase® via Elsevier®, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, recovering evidence from inception until September 4th, 2024. Eligible reviews investigated patient safety concerns arising from real-time interactions between healthcare professionals and patients through information and communication technologies (ICT), including telephones and videoconferencing tools. We included systematic reviews examining real-time telehealth interactions between healthcare professionals and patients, addressing safety concerns. We followed standard Joanna Briggs Institute methods for conducting the scoping review.
resultsA total of 3,641 titles and abstracts were retrieved, and after screening, 15 systematic reviews were included, encompassing 315 studies. These reviews addressed various patient populations, healthcare settings, and telehealth interventions, including virtual consultations, telepharmacy, and telerehabilitation. All 15 reviews reported patient safety risks associated with telehealth, the most frequently reported concern was the patient's experience, highlighted in 53.3% (n = 8) of the included studies. Additional concerns involved user knowledge gaps and the lack of safety criteria in evaluation protocols. These risks were categorized into five domains: patient experience, safety in prescribing medication, effective communication, training and education, and patient identification.
conclusionThis scoping review provides evidence that, although telehealth offers valuable alternatives for healthcare delivery, all evidence highlights specific patient safety risks that require attention. Further research is essential to better understand and mitigate these risks. Strategic investments in education, training, and structured implementation are critical to minimizing adverse events and enhancing patient safety in synchronous telehealth.
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.