ArticleJU open plus2025
A Qualitative Analysis of Telemedicine Use Among Urban and Rural Patients With Urologic Malignancies.
Article in JU open plus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: To better understand patient perceptions on utilizing telemedicine for the management of urologic malignancies. Materials and Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with patients with bladder, prostate, or kidney cancer. Interviews were conducted by phone, audio-recorded, transcribed, and deidentified. A thematic analysis was performed to examine patients' perceptions of telemedicine and its role in their care. We compared the experiences of rural and urban patients to better understand the impact that telemedicine could have and urban-rural disparities in urologic oncology. Results: We conducted 40 patient interviews. Seventy percent of patients lived in urban areas, and 30% lived in rural areas. Three primary themes were identified: (1) the benefit of telemedicine, primarily convenience, (2) variable appropriateness of telemedicine, and (3) concerns over possible impacts of telemedicine on care quality. Patients had a generally favorable telemedicine experience and appreciated that it was convenient and reduced the travel time and burden associated with getting care. However, they thought it was only appropriate in certain situations, such as routine follow-ups and to supplement in-person visits and if used incorrectly could affect care quality. Conclusions: Telemedicine has a valuable role in the care of patients with urologic malignancies. It reduces the burden of receiving care for rural patients, and optimizing its use may help reduce urban-rural disparities in outcomes. Future studies should study the impact that telemedicine has on quality.
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.