ArticleBMJ open2026
Comparing the safety and quality of video versus telephone telehealth using simulated consultations on fictional medications for an Australian community sample: a randomised controlled trial protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInternationally, routine telehealth consultations have been extensively implemented in primary care in telephone or video-based formats. Despite this widespread implementation, few studies have compared information exchange quality in telephone and video-based consultations from consumer and clinician perspectives, nor have they examined related indicators of safety.This protocol reports on a randomised controlled trial assessing safety and quality of telehealth consultations across telephone versus video-based modalities for simulated consultations about a fictional medication. The primary safety outcome is patient-centred delayed memory recall accuracy as a proxy for medication-information safety. Secondary outcomes include immediate recall accuracy and quality outcomes captured through patient-reported consultation experience and outcome measures. Findings can be used to develop guidance for clinicians and consumers in their selection of the most suitable telehealth modality for medication discussions, ultimately improving primary healthcare delivery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this study, community participants aged 18-44 complete a simulated telehealth consultation with an actor-general practitioner (GP) through telephone or video, during which they learn about a fictional medication they are advised to take.Consultation safety will be reflected through participant memory of medication usage items including: frequency, timing, administration instructions, and side effects. Immediate memory will be assessed at the end of each consultation. After a 2-day delay, delayed memory will be assessed using structured recall questions. Consultation quality will be assessed at the end of each consultation through patient-reported outcome measures including: perceived therapeutic alliance with the GP, perceived empathy of the GP, behavioural intentions about medication usage, and risk perceptions regarding medication usage. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol (ID: H/2024/1249) received ethics approval from the Australian National University Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) on 14 November 2025. Protocol amendments will be approved by The Australian National University HREC. Study findings will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals, presentations at academic conferences, and via the study website. TRIAL REGISTRATION AND DATA STATEMENT: The trial protocol including a full statistical analysis plan was prospectively registered to OSF (registration ID: osf.io/r6as3) prior to commencement of data collection. De-identified participant data, statistical code, and all materials used will also be uploaded to an online database.
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.