Synchronous Teleconsultation and Monitoring Service Targeting COVID-19: Leveraging Insights for Postpandemic Health Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although a great number of teleconsultation services have been developed during the COVID-19 pandemic, studies assessing usability and health care provider satisfaction are still incipient. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the development, implementation, and expansion of a synchronous teleconsultation service targeting patients with symptoms of COVID-19 in Brazil, as well as to assess its usability and health care professionals' satisfaction. METHODS: This mixed methods study was developed in 5 phases: (1) the identification of components, technical and functional requirements, and system architecture; (2) system and user interface development and validation; (3) pilot-testing in the city of Divinópolis; (4) expansion in the cities of Divinópolis, Teófilo Otoni, and Belo Horizonte for Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais faculty and students; and (5) usability and satisfaction assessment, using Likert-scale and open-ended questions. RESULTS: During pilot development, problems contacting users were solved by introducing standardized SMS text messages, which were sent to users to obtain their feedback and keep track of them. Until April 2022, the expanded system served 31,966 patients in 146,158 teleconsultations. Teleconsultations were initiated through chatbot in 27.7% (40,486/146,158) of cases. Teleconsultation efficiency per city was 93.7% (13,317/14,212) in Teófilo Otoni, 92.4% (11,747/12,713) in Divinópolis, and 98.8% (4981/5041) in Belo Horizonte (university campus), thus avoiding in-person assistance for a great majority of patients. In total, 50 (83%) out of 60 health care professionals assessed the system's usability as satisfactory, despite a few system instability problems. CONCLUSIONS: The system provided updated information about COVID-19 and enabled remote care for thousands of patients, which evidenced the critical role of telemedicine in expanding emergency services capacity during the pandemic. The dynamic nature of the current pandemic required fast planning, implementation, development, and updates in the system. Usability and satisfaction assessment was key to identifying areas for improvement. The experience reported here is expected to inform telemedicine strategies to be implemented in a postpandemic scenario.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".