ReviewEuropean journal of pediatrics2026
Telemedicine in pediatrics: a critical narrative review of innovations, limitations, and future priorities.
Review in European journal of pediatrics, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This narrative review synthesizes recent technological and organizational developments in pediatric telemedicine, maps their principal clinical applications, and critically discusses implementation, safety, equity, and future priorities. This narrative review used a transparent, non-systematic literature-search approach in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar, considering publications available through April 2026. Searches were intended to identify and contextualize relevant literature across pediatric settings rather than to provide an exhaustive, reproducible systematic evidence synthesis. No formal risk-of-bias assessment, meta-analysis, or certainty-of-evidence grading was undertaken; therefore, findings are interpreted cautiously and according to the maturity and consistency of the available evidence. Evidence suggests that telemedicine can support follow-up, access to specialist care, and family engagement in several pediatric chronic-care pathways, particularly diabetes and asthma. However, the evidence base is heterogeneous across specialties, frequently relies on observational or implementation studies, and is less mature for acute assessment, neonatal and rehabilitation uses, wearables, and AI-enabled tools.
conclusionTelemedicine should be considered a complementary component of pediatric healthcare rather than a replacement for in-person assessment. Hybrid models may support accessibility, continuity, and sustainability when embedded in structured, patient-centered, equitable, and clinically appropriate pathways. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Telemedicine expanded rapidly in pediatrics during the COVID-19 pandemic and is now used across many specialties. • It can improve access, continuity of care, remote monitoring, and family engagement, especially in chronic and complex conditions. WHAT IS NEW: • This review summarizes recent technological and organizational innovations, including wearables, mHealth, EHR integration, AI, and hybrid care models. • It highlights current limits and future requirements for safe, equitable, and sustainable integration into routine pediatric care.
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.