MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206222061 · doi:10.2196/32373

Exploring Quality Differences in Telemedicine Between Hospital Outpatient Departments and Community Clinics: Cross-sectional Study

2022· article· en· W4206222061 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Noora Alhajri, Mecit Can Emre Simsekler, Buthaina Alfalasi, Mohamed Alhashmi, Hamda Memon, Emma Housser, Abdulhamid Mustafa Abdi, Nahed Balalaa, Maryam Al Ali, Raghda Almaashari, Shammah Al Memari, Farida Al Hosani, Yousif Al Zaabi, Shereena Almazrouei, Hamed Alhashemi

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKhalifa University of Science, Technology and Research
KeywordsTelemedicineMedicinePatient satisfactionCross-sectional studyPandemicOutpatient clinicHealth careFamily medicineMedical emergencyCommunity hospitalNursingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine is a care delivery modality that has the potential to broaden the reach and flexibility of health care services. In the United Arab Emirates, telemedicine services are mainly delivered through either integrated hospital outpatient department (OPDs) or community clinics. However, it is unknown if patients' perceptions of, and satisfaction with, telemedicine services differ between these two types of health care systems during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to explore the differences in patients' perceptions of, and satisfaction with, telemedicine between hospital OPDs and community clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic. We also aimed to identify patient- or visit-related characteristics contributing to patient satisfaction with telemedicine. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study that was conducted at Abu Dhabi health care centers, we invited outpatients aged 18 years or over, who completed a telemedicine visit during the COVID-19 pandemic, to participate in our study. Patients' perceptions of, and satisfaction with, telemedicine regarding the two system types (ie, hospital OPDs and community clinics) were assessed using an online survey that was sent as a link through the SMS system. Regression models were used to describe the association between patient- and visit-related characteristics, as well as the perception of, and satisfaction with, telemedicine services. RESULTS: A total of 515 patients participated in this survey. Patients' satisfaction with telemedicine services was equally high among the settings, with no statistically significant difference between the two setting types (hospital OPDs: 253/343, 73.8%; community clinics: 114/172, 66.3%; P=.19). Video consultation was significantly associated with increased patient satisfaction (odds ratio [OR] 2.57, 95% CI 1.04-6.33; P=.04) and patients' support of the transition to telemedicine use during and after the pandemic (OR 2.88, 95% CI 1.18-7.07; P=.02). Patients who used video consultations were more likely to report that telemedicine improved access to health care services (OR 3.06, 95% CI 1.71-8.03; P=.02), reduced waiting times and travel costs (OR 4.94, 95% CI 1.15-21.19; P=.03), addressed patients' needs (OR 2.63, 95% CI 1.13-6.11; P=.03), and eased expression of patients' medical concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic (OR 2.19, 95% CI 0.89-5.38; P=.09). Surprisingly, middle-aged patients were two times more likely to be satisfied with telemedicine services (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.09-4.14; P=.03), as compared to any other age group in this study. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that patient satisfaction was unaffected by the health system setting in which patients received the teleconsultations, whether they were at hospitals or community clinics. Video consultation was associated with increased patient satisfaction with telemedicine services. Efforts should be focused on strategic planning for enhanced telemedicine services, video consultation in particular, for both emergent circumstances, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, and day-to-day health care delivery.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.830

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.243
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207