MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4220768103 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1224449/v1

Effects of the Covid-19 Pandemic on the use of online video consultation of general practitioners in Germany – a secondary data analysis of German Health Insurance Data

2022· preprint· en· W4220768103 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nathalie Petrick, Cordula Kreuzenbeck

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)GermanGovernment (linguistics)Psychological interventionDescriptive statisticsPandemicTelemedicineHealth careFamily medicineMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)NursingGeographyDiseasePolitical scienceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background:In order to manage the Covid-19 pandemic in Germany in March 2020, the government implemented non-pharmaceutical interventions including school closures, case-based measures, social distancing, and a ban of all public events. Given the circumstances, professional societies and associations in the healthcare sector recommended the use of video consultations.The objective of this analysis was to generate statistically relevant insights into the use of video consultations before and during the Covid-19 pandemic.Methods:This study is based on the analysis of a comprehensive claims data set comprising anonymized data of 5.6 million beneficiaries of a large German health insurance fund. The dataset encompassed healthcare claims from 1 January 2019 to 30 June 2020 covering 29,464,913 patient contacts. The claims were divided into video consultations and face-to-face consultations. This paper presents descriptive statistics and analyses associations between variables. Results:In 8,077 out of all contacts, a video consultation had taken place. This translates into 2.75 of 10,000 contacts. There was no significant difference in the utilization of video consultations by gender. However, the age differed significantly (Chi-square=2219,11 > Critical Value= 19,68) between the contacts with or without use of video consultation. There is an increase from 0.0000525% to 0.0002529% in the first Quarter and 0.0000461% to 0.0014307% in the second Quarter which is not significant. Conclusions:Apparent higher usage of telemedicine in the age group 50 to 64 years and the very low usage in the following groups of 65-74 year old patients shows that the use of video consultation is age sensitive and should be subject to goal oriented implementation of telemedical offers. Although there are many claims, that the video consultation has risen dramatically through the Covid-19 pandemic. There is no such evidence in this large dataset, because the increase is on a small level relatively to the patient contacts and not significant. Qualitative research to determine the factors for patients and general practitioners that lead to or hinder the use of video consultation should help in addressing the slow digitalization in the outpatient sector in Germany.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.341
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation→French-language works237,207→