ArticlePLOS digital health2026
The impact of virtual care on drug prescribing practices: A scoping review.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Upon the emergence of COVID-19, virtual alternatives to in-person care developed quickly to meet the need of physicians to maintain medical distancing from patients. Virtual care has since become a mainstay in the landscape of primary care with many physicians providing both virtual and in-person visit options within their practice. However, due to its rapid development, questions have been raised regarding the quality of virtual care compared to its in-person alternative, particularly in terms of prescribing appropriateness. Thus, we examined whether global prescribing patterns differed between virtual and in-person physician visits following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted a scoping review of global literature with narrative synthesis to assess whether and how prescribing patterns differed between virtual and in-person care. This review revealed mixed findings, with the majority of studies reporting no significant difference in medication or antibiotic prescribing rates. Some weak evidence suggested virtual care may be associated with greater adherence to clinical guidelines. However, the predominance of United States based studies and methodological limitations precluded strong conclusions, particularly for the Canadian context. Our scoping review found no consensus in the global literature on how prescribing patterns differ between virtual and in-person care. The methodological weaknesses and limited generalizability of the existing body of evidence highlights the need for further high-quality research in a broader range of settings.
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.