MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226050510 · doi:10.7759/cureus.23837

Physician Satisfaction With Virtual Ophthalmology Clinics During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Tertiary Eye Care Center Experience

2022· article· en· W4226050510 on OpenAlexaff
Adi Mohammed Al Owaifeer, Samar A. Al-Swailem, Abdulaziz M Al Dehailan, Abdulrahman Al Naim, Mohammed F Al Molhim, Rajiv Khandekar

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Optic Conditions
Canadian institutionsCanadian Association of Nurses in OncologyUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicOptometryFamily medicineEye carePatient satisfactionTertiary careGlaucomaOphthalmologyDiseaseNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background In this study, we aimed to assess ophthalmologists' experience with teleophthalmology during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the central region of Saudi Arabia. In addition, we evaluated their satisfaction level and explored their satisfaction determinants. Methodology We conducted an online survey for ophthalmologists who participated in the virtual ophthalmology clinic during COVID-19 between November 2020 and September 2021. The survey was used to evaluate ophthalmologists' experience with teleophthalmology during the pandemic. Ophthalmologists were asked to measure their satisfaction with equipment and technical issues, communication, and clinical assessment, and to provide an overall program evaluation. Data were analyzed via frequency measures (e.g., numbers, percentages, mean, and standard deviation). Results Out of the 113 ophthalmologists who were invited to participate in our study, 71 completed the survey. In total, 23 (32.4%) participants were general ophthalmologists, 15 (21.1%) were subspecialists in the cornea, 16 (22.5%) were subspecialists in glaucoma, one (1.4%) was a subspecialist in neuro-ophthalmology, seven (9.9%) were subspecialists in pediatric ophthalmology, eight (11.3%) were subspecialists in the retina, and one (1.4%) participant was a subspecialist in oculoplastic. Overall, 56.3% of the respondents were satisfied with teleophthalmology. Ophthalmologists who subspecialized in the retina demonstrated higher levels of satisfaction than other subspecialties. The most common challenge reported by ophthalmologists in the virtual consultation was the lack of adequate equipment to evaluate the patients (53.5%), followed by technical issues (43.7%) and the patients' lack of experience in using virtual consultation services (38%). Overall satisfaction score was the highest among ophthalmologists who reported providing at least five video consultations before the survey. Conclusions The findings from our study suggest that the subspeciality of ophthalmologists and the number of video consultations conducted by ophthalmologists are important determinants in their level of satisfaction with teleophthalmology. The majority of the respondents were satisfied with the virtual clinic during the COVID-19 pandemic. The current pandemic could pave the way for the future use of telemedicine in ophthalmology if virtual eye examinations become standardized.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicRetinal and Optic ConditionsFrench-language works237,207