MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2732862572 · doi:10.2196/medinform.6323

Telemedicine Services for the Arctic: A Systematic Review

2017· review· en· W2732862572 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ashenafi Zebene Woldaregay, Ståle Walderhaug, Gunnar Hartvigsen

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2017
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésTelemedicineThe arcticArcticBusinessMedical emergencyTelecommunicationsEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceHealth careMedicineEconomic growthEnvironmental scienceOceanography

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine services have been successfully used in areas where there are adequate infrastructures such as reliable power and communication lines. However, despite the increasing number of merchants and seafarers, maritime and Arctic telemedicine have had limited success. This might be linked with various factors such as lack of good infrastructure, lack of trained onboard personnel, lack of Arctic-enhanced telemedicine equipment, extreme weather conditions, remoteness, and other geographical challenges. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review was to assess and analyze the current status of telemedicine services in the context of maritime conditions, extreme weather (ie, Arctic weather), and remote accidents and emergencies. Moreover, the paper aimed to identify successfully implemented telemedicine services in the Arctic region and in maritime settings and remote emergency situations and present state of the art systems for these areas. Finally, we identified the status quo of telemedicine services in the context of search and rescue (SAR) scenarios in these extreme conditions. METHODS: A rigorous literature search was conducted between September 7 and October 28, 2015, through various online databases. Peer reviewed journals and articles were considered. Relevant articles were first identified by reviewing the title, keywords, and abstract for a preliminary filter with our selection criteria, and then we reviewed full-text articles that seemed relevant. Information from the selected literature was extracted based on some predefined categories, which were defined based on previous research and further elaborated upon via iterative brainstorming. RESULTS: The initial hits were vetted using the title, abstract, and keywords, and we retrieved a total of 471 papers. After removing duplicates from the list, 422 records remained. Then, we did an independent assessment of the articles and screening based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, which eliminated another 219 papers, leaving 203 relevant papers. After a full-text assessment, 36 articles were left, which were critically analyzed. The inter-rater agreement was measured using Cohen Kappa test, and disagreements were resolved through discussion. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the increasing number of fishermen and other seafarers, Arctic and maritime working conditions are mainly characterized by an absence of access to health care facilities. The condition is further aggravated for fishermen and seafarers who are working in the Arctic regions. In spite of the existing barriers and challenges, some telemedicine services have recently been successfully delivered in these areas. These services include teleconsultation (9/37, 24%), teleradiology (8/37, 22%), teledermatology and tele-education (3/37, 8%), telemonitoring and telecardiology (telesonography) (1/37, 3%), and others (10/37, 27%). However, the use of telemedicine in relation to search and rescue (SAR) services is not yet fully exploited. Therefore, we foresee that these implemented and evaluated telemedicine services will serve as underlying models for the successful implementation of future search and rescue (SAR) services.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,494
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0060,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,098
Tête enseignante GPT0,438
Écart entre enseignants0,340 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations34
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR Medical InformaticsMême sujetTrauma and Emergency Care StudiesTravaux en français237 207