ReviewOnline journal of public health informatics2026
Trend in Devices and Digital Tools for Remote Consultation From Medical Providers to Specialists: Scoping Review.
Review in Online journal of public health informatics, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Digital health care technologies, including mobile applications and telemedicine platforms, have transformed how medical professionals communicate and deliver care. Remote consultation by doctors plays a vital role in ensuring access to appropriate expertise, particularly in medically underserved or geographically remote areas. However, the diversity in technological modalities, devices, and patterns of use across specialties and regions has not been systematically mapped. Objective: This study aimed to explore the current status and characteristics of teleconsultations among medical providers and specialists, focusing on device use, consultation modalities, clinical specialties, and regional differences. Through this approach, we aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of technological and practical trends in mobile health (mHealth) and telemedicine. Methods: A systematic scoping review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines using the MEDLINE and Embase databases. The search covered studies published up to February 2026, with no restrictions on the publication year. Studies meeting the predefined inclusion criteria were also included. Results: A total of 255 citations were screened, and 99 articles were included. Studies were analyzed according to consultation method, target, and regional characteristics. Of these, 81 out of 99 (81.8%) articles were in the doctor-to-doctor category. Email, web, or app-based platforms were the most common. In addition, 86 out of 99 studies used medical images, most frequently photographs. Orthopedics and dermatology were the most frequently involved specialties, followed by internal medicine. Regarding the region, 60 of 99 studies were domestic, and the other 39 studies were international. Rural-to-urban domestic consultations comprised 27 out of 99 (27.3%) studies, whereas consultations from low- and middle-income countries and high-income countries accounted for 11 of 99 (11%) studies. Conclusions: This review examined doctor-to-doctor and doctor-to-patient consultations with doctor involvement. Specialties in which medical images are central, such as orthopedics and dermatology, were more frequently represented than in other fields. This highlights disparities in the use of teleconsultation across clinical disciplines and suggests that addressing these imbalances is essential for broader adoption. Furthermore, the findings indicated a progressive shift from videoconference-based interactions to mobile and app-based platforms, reflecting ongoing technological advancements. Optimizing the integration of these digital tools and promoting equitable access are critical for enhancing the quality and reach of teleconsultation practices in future digital health systems.
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.