ArticleDigital health
Patient and clinician experiences of remote consultation during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: A service evaluation.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Factors associated with satisfaction with teledentistry care among patients from a rural and an urban population in Peru during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Decoding perceived risks in online healthcare services: a safety-trust model based on grounded theory.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Revisiting Ian McWhinney's principles in the digital health age.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2025Article
- Acceptance and readiness for tele-dentistry among dental professionals amidst conflict in Sudan.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Piloting an In Situ Training Program in Video Consultations in a Gynaecological Outpatient Clinic at a University Hospital: A Qualitative Study of the Healthcare Professionals' Perspectives.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Level of diagnostic agreement in musculoskeletal shoulder diagnosis between remote and face-to-face consultations: A retrospective service evaluation.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Exploring the Economic Aspects of Hospitals: A Comprehensive Examination of Relevant Factors.Cureus · 2024Review
- Article
- Patient Perceptions and Satisfaction With Virtual Clinics During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study.Cureus · 2023Article
- Editorial: Back to the future: on the road towards precision psychiatry, volume II.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Digital technology and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: a narrative review with a focus on depression, anxiety, stress, and trauma.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, clinicians were instructed to move all but emergency consultations to remote means to reduce the spread of the virus. The aim of this study was to evaluate patients' and clinicians' experiences of moving to remote means of consultation with their health care professionals during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Methods: The study design was a qualitative service evaluation. Twenty-six clinicians and forty-eight patients who met the inclusion criteria consented to be interviewed. Clinician participants were from either medical, nursing, or allied health professional backgrounds. Patients were recruited from diabetes, acute care, and haematology and cancer areas. Data analysis was conducted using a thematic analysis framework. Results: Following coding and thematic analysis of the data collected from clinicians, five themes were identified: personal and professional well-being; providing a safe and high-quality experience; adapting to a new way of working; making remote consultations fit for purpose and an awareness of altered dynamics during consultation. Patient data was coded into 3 themes: remote consultation adds value; remote consultation brings challenges and concerns about remote consultation. Conclusions: Clinician and patient experiences reported here are reflected in the literature. The study indicates that remote consultation is not suitable for all patients and in all contexts. Whilst maintaining the benefits to patients, remote means of consultation needs organisational support and preparation. A way forward that maintains the benefits whilst addressing concerns seems urgent.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.