MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200297414 · doi:10.2196/35439

Trends in Teledermatology Utilization in the United States

2021· article· en· W4200297414 on OpenAlex
Akash D. Patel, Chandler W. Rundle, Meenal Kheterpal

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIproceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTeledermatologyMedicineFamily medicineHealth carePandemicSocioeconomic statusMedical emergencyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Environmental healthTelemedicinePopulationPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Teledermatology is an effective health care delivery model that has seen tremendous growth over the last decade. This growth can be attributed to a variety of factors, including but not limited to an increased access to dermatologic care for those with socioeconomic or geographic barriers, a reduction in health care costs for both the patient and the physician, and the delivery of high-quality dermatologic care. However, the associated barriers include practice reimbursements, interstate licensing, and liability. Despite these apparent barriers, the emergence of COVID-19 afforded teledermatology a surge of demand and loosened regulations, allowing dermatologists to see higher volumes of teledermatology patients. In this paper, we analyzed the American Academy of Dermatology’s DataDerm registry teledermatology utilization and patient demographic trends throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective The aim of this paper was to characterize national-level teledermatology demographic data in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods National-level data were curated for all practices enrolled in the American Academy of Dermatology’s DataDerm registry from April 1, 2020, through June 30, 2021. Encounter utilization rates were collected for visit type (ie, teledermatology versus in person), sex, race, age, insurance provider, and location (ie, in state versus out of state). The aggregate total data, as opposed to individual encounter data, were collected. Results The proportion of women who utilized services via teledermatology (65,023/98,642, 65.9%) was greater than that of those who utilized in-person services (29,40,122/50,48,450, 58.2%). Non-White patients made up a higher percentage of teledermatology utilizers (8920/62,324, 15%) when compared with in-person utilizers (3,94,580/35,08,150, 11.7%). Younger patients (aged <40) contributed more to teledermatology service utilization (62,695/75,319, 83.2%) when compared with in-person services (13,29,218/33,01,175, 40.3%). Medicare was a larger payor contributor for in-person services (8232/1,53,279, 25.2%) than for teledermatology services (10,89,777/43,30,882, 5.4%). Utilization by out-of-state patients was proportionally higher for teledermatology services (19,422/1,33,416, 14.6%) compared with in-person services (5,80,358/1,38,31,400, 4.2%). Conclusions Teledermatology services may reach and benefit certain populations (female, younger patients, those with non-White racial backgrounds, and out-of-state patients) more so than others. These baseline demographics may also serve to highlight populations for potential future teledermatology outreach efforts. Conflict of Interest None declared.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.637
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it