ArticleBMJ open2025
Qualitative exploration of consumers' experiences and perceptions of telehealth for allied health services in Australia.
Article in BMJ open, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe COVID-19 pandemic accelerated telehealth adoption, offering remote consultations via phone and video. Allied health services are one part of the healthcare system where telehealth, in specific teleconsultations, has been applied and has shown promising results in improving healthcare access by breaking down financial, logistical and geographic barriers. However, more insight is needed into the consumer's perspective. A consumer is anyone who has used, currently uses or will use telehealth for allied health services. Therefore, this study explores consumer experiences and preferences, identifying barriers and facilitators to telehealth for allied health services.
methodsThis qualitative study used focus group discussions to evaluate consumers' experiences with telehealth for allied health services. Allied health was defined as healthcare professionals distinct from medical, dental and nursing fields. Eight focus groups with 57 participants were conducted. The participants were recruited from the general public as well as seldom represented communities such as a support service focused on improving and maintaining members' mental health, the deaf and hard-of-hearing community, young disabled people and the Pacific Islander community. An inductive thematic analysis was used to analyse the data.
resultsFive main themes were identified. First, the consumer with their individual characteristics and context played a major role in the suitability of telehealth. Second, the allied health practitioner and their skills influenced the quality and therefore the success of remote consultations. Further, the relationship between consumer and practitioner contributed to the success of telehealth. The appointment itself was equally often discussed. While telehealth improved access to care, remote appointments were seen as more suitable for questions and verbal exchanges. Lastly, the technology was an important factor with the availability of necessary technology and the accessibility of it playing a central role.
conclusionsThe findings reinforce existing research while highlighting new insights from often under-represented groups, emphasising the importance of telehealth choice, accessible technology and quality standards.
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.