ReviewJournal of medical Internet research2024
Provision of Digital Primary Health Care Services: Overview of Reviews.
Review in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Family Physicians' Use of, Barriers to, and Attitudes Toward Remote Diagnosis and Treatment in China: A National Web-Based Survey.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- [Digital health and its impacts on the access of minority groups to primary care: a systematic reviewLa salud digital y su impacto en el acceso a la atención primaria de salud en grupos minoritarios: revisión sistemática].Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDigital health is a growing field, and many digital interventions have been implemented on a large scale since the COVID-19 pandemic, mainly in primary health care (PHC). The development of digital health interventions and their application in PHC are encouraged by the World Health Organization. The increased number of published scientific papers on this topic has resulted in an overwhelming amount of information, but there is no overview of reviews to summarize this evidence.
objectiveThis study aims to provide policy makers, health managers, and researchers with a summary of evidence on digital interventions used in PHC.
methodsThis overview of reviews searched the Web of Science and MEDLINE databases for systematic and scoping reviews on assessments of digital technologies implemented in PHC published from January 2007 to March 2023. Only reviews that addressed digital interventions whose targets were real patients or health care providers (HCPs) were included.
resultsA total of 236 records were identified from the search strategy, of which 42 (17.8%) full-text papers were selected for analysis, and 18 (7.6%) reviews met the eligibility criteria. In total, 61% (11/18) of the reviews focused their analysis on specific digital health interventions (client-to-provider telemedicine, provider-to-provider telemedicine, health worker decision support systems, systems for tracking patients' health status, client participation and self-care platforms, and provision of education and training to health workers), and 39% (7/18) of the reviews focused on specific topics related to PHC (preventive care, chronic disease management, behavioral health disorders, the COVID-19 pandemic, multicomponent PHC interventions, and care coordination). Most studies in the included reviews agreed on barriers to implementation, such as software and apps developed without involving end users, the lack of training of HCPs and patients in digital technology use, and the lack of reimbursement and billing strategies for remote consultations. However, they showed several mixed results related to health service quality and patients' clinical conditions and behavior changes.
conclusionsResearch in digital health applied to PHC is still concentrated in high-income countries, mainly in North America and Europe. The mixed results related to health service quality and patients' clinical conditions or behavior changes may have been caused by deficiencies in the process of implementing digital interventions. It is necessary to examine the entire impact pathway and the causal relationship among implementation, health service quality, and clinical condition outcomes to support the spread of digital health in PHC settings.
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.