ReviewCurrent oncology reports2026
Tele-Oncology in the Post-Pandemic Era: Clinical Integration, Access Disparities and Medico-Legal Accountability.
Review in Current oncology reports, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of the reviewTele-health has evolved from a marginal tool confined to rural populations and selected follow-up programs into a structurally integrated component of modern cancer care. Prior to COVID-19, its adoption was constrained by regulatory fragmentation, non-uniform reimbursement, and licensure barriers. This narrative review evaluates the evolutionary integration of tele-health in oncology post-COVID-19, examines digital disparities across patient populations, and addresses the medico-legal implications of this integration, with the objective of providing a comprehensive and clinically actionable framework for the governance of virtual oncology care. RECENT
findingsThe pandemic acted as a global catalyst, driving telehealth to over 50% of oncology outpatient encounters in some settings, before stabilising post-pandemic at approximately 10-20% of consultations within hybrid care models. Evidence supports meaningful clinical benefits - improved access to specialist services, reduced travel burden, and sustained continuity of care - with outcomes comparable to in-person care in postoperative follow-up, symptom monitoring, and survivorship. However, persistent disparities in device availability, connectivity, and digital literacy disproportionately affect older, rural, and socioeconomically disadvantaged patients, raising the risk that geographic inequalities are replaced by technological ones. From a medico-legal standpoint, the remote modality does not modify the applicable standard of care, yet restricted physical examination and reliance on patient-reported data introduce risks of diagnostic delay and incomplete clinical assessment, with direct implications for professional liability, data protection under HIPAA and GDPR, cross-border licensure, and multi-party accountability across physicians, institutions, and technology providers. Tele-oncology has become a permanent structural feature of modern cancer care, offering demonstrable benefits in access, continuity, and patient satisfaction. Yet its integration has been uneven, its governance remains fragmented, and its medico-legal landscape is still evolving. Realising the full potential of virtual oncology care - equitably and safely - requires coherent regulatory frameworks, sustained investment in digital infrastructure, and explicit attention to the populations at greatest risk of being left behind.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42678573What 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.