ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025
The impact of tele-expertise in oncology: current state and future perspectives.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital oncology interventions and equity: a scoping review of design strategies to address cancer disparities.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Genomic innovations in cancer prevention, diagnosis, prognosis and precision therapeutics.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Review
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
Background: Tele-expertise, the asynchronous exchange of medical expertise via secured digital platforms, is revolutionizing healthcare delivery. By overcoming geographical and logistical barriers, it enables timely access to specialized care and supports multidisciplinary decision-making, particularly in oncology. Its adoption has accelerated with the COVID-19 pandemic and regulatory changes, improving patient outcomes by facilitating efficient diagnosis and treatment. Materials and methods: An anaysis of peer-reviewed studies published in the past decade was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library. The inclusion criteria focused on studies evaluating tele-expertise for remote consultations, imaging interpretation, pathology evaluation, and multidisciplinary tumor boards. Methodological quality, including study design, sample size, and reliability of outcomes, was assessed. Cross-referencing and manual searches were performed to ensure comprehensive coverage. Results: The review demonstrated that tele-expertise improves access to specialized consultations, enhances diagnostic accuracy, and expedites clinical decision-making. Applications in oncology include remote imaging interpretation and support for multidisciplinary teams. Challenges identified include the transmission of large imaging files, the need for secure and robust IT infrastructure, and training healthcare providers. Ethical considerations, such as data privacy and medical liability, remain key barriers. Conclusion: Tele-expertise is transforming healthcare by enabling equitable access to specialized care and fostering collaboration in oncology. Addressing challenges related to infrastructure, training, and ethical issues is critical to maximizing its potential. The integration of AI and further advancements in telemedicine platforms will enhance its role in delivering high-quality, timely care globally.
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.