ArticleArchives of academic emergency medicine2026
Current Status and Determinant Factors of Telemedicine Adoption in Selected Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) Countries; A Mix Method Study.
Article in Archives of academic emergency medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The field of telemedicine has become an urgent innovation in the healthcare field worldwide, but there is still an unequal distribution of its implementation in transitional economies. This study aimed to evaluate the associated factors of telemedicine adoption in selected countries of the commonwealth of independent states (CIS) region. Methods: A validated survey was used to collect data on 600 healthcare professionals, patients, information technology (IT) specialists and policymakers from selected CIS countries, using a mixed-method design. Through a designed and validated questionnaire, solid statistical techniques, and cross-regional analyses, the barriers and facilitators of telemedicine adoption in studied countries were evaluated. Results: The general average score of telemedicine adoption was 3.84 ± 0.92. The highest mean adoption score was observed in Azerbaijan (4.02 ± 0.85), Russia (3.91 ± 0.88) and Ukraine (3.87 ± 0.91). There were significant differences between regions regarding mean adoption score (p < 0.001). Clinician acceptance (r = 0.64; p < 0.01), infrastructure readiness (r = 0.58; p < 0.01), regulatory maturity (r = 0.42; p < 0.01), and patient digital literacy (r = 0.36; p < 0.01) had the strongest correlation with telemedicine adoption. The most predictive factors of telemedicine adoption were infrastructure readiness (β (standard error; SE) = 0.42 (0.05), p < 0.001), then clinician acceptance (β (SE) = 0.39 (0.06), p < 0.001), patient digital literacy (β (SE) = 0.22 (0.05), p < 0.001), and regulatory maturity (β (SE) = 0.18 (0.04), p < 0.001). Professional experience had a minor yet significant impact (β = 0.09, t = 0.038). Logistic regression showed increased infrastructure readiness score (odds ratio (OR) = 1.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.21-1.81), clinician acceptance score (OR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.28-1.92), regulatory maturity score (OR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.09-1.58), and patient literacy score (OR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.03-1.45) as the predictors of high telemedicine adoption (≥70%). The model accurately categorized 78.2% of data and the area under the curve 0.79 (95% CI: 0.75-0.83) meaning the model is a strong predictor. Conclusion: The findings showed that the structural investments cannot be made alone without the involvement of professionals. The research contributes to the existing body of transitional economies research by offering strong comparative evidence of telemedicine and provides policy recommendations on how to improve infrastructure, generate harmonization, and capacity building of clinicians and patients to support sustainable digital health ecosystems.
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.