ArticleBMC health services research2022
Stakeholder perceptions affecting the implementation of teleophthalmology.
Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of a Collaborative Telehealth Model for Eye Care Between Ophthalmology and Optometry in Western Australia.The Australian journal of rural health · 2026Article
- Teleophthalmology adoption and perceived barriers among Colombian general practitioners: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- National Experience of Technology-based Eye Care Services: A Comprehensive Ophthalmology Telemedicine Initiative.Ophthalmology · 2025Article
- The Benefits and Challenges of Implementing Teleophthalmology in Low-Resource Settings: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- Healthcare Outcomes of Patients and Antecedents via Teleophthalmology in Eastern Taiwan during COVID-19.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTeleophthalmology has become the subject of heightened interest and scrutiny in the wake of the SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic. A streamlined implementation framework becomes increasingly important as demand grows. This study identified obstacles to teleophthalmology implementation through summative content analysis of key stakeholders' perceptions.
designSummative content analysis of transcribed interviews with key stakeholders (including patients, technicians, ophthalmic readers, staff, nurses, and administrators at two teleophthalmology clinic sites).
methodsKeyword Were counted and compared to examine underlying meaning. Two analysts coded text independently using MAXQDA for summative qualitative content analysis to derive themes and hierarchical relationships as a basis for future refinement of TECS implementation. xMind ZEN was used to map conceptual relationships and overarching themes that emerged to identify perceived facilitators and barriers to implementation
resultsAnalysis revealed two themes common to perceptions: (1) benefits of care, and (2) ease of implementation. Perceived benefits included efficiency, accessibility, and earlier intervention in disease course. The quality and quantity of training was heavily weighted in its influence on stakeholders' commitment to and confidence in the program, as were transparent organizational structure, clear bidirectional communication, and the availability of support staff.
conclusionUsing a determinant framework of implementation science, this report highlighted potential hindrances to teleophthalmology implementation and offered solutions in order to increase access to screening, improve the quality of care provided, and facilitate sustainability of the innovation.
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.