P65 A patient-led survey into the benefits and limitations of telemedicine appointments for assessing children and young people with rheumatic conditions: Comparing European and Canadian cohorts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction/Background During the COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic, some provision of healthcare shifted to remote, technology-assisted appointments (telemedicine). Whilst parents/carers of children and young people with rheumatic conditions have reported benefits of telemedicine, concerns remain. This patient and parent-led project sought to understand the views of parents/carers about telemedicine, identifying the benefits and limitations of remote technology-assisted appointments, and comparing views between Canadian and European cohorts. Description/Method An online survey was developed, translated into multiple languages and shared via social media and patient organisations, targeted at parents of children and young people with rheumatic, autoimmune and autoinflammatory conditions. Fieldwork took place in April 2021 in Europe and May 2021 in Canada. Consent was provided during enrolment. Discussion/Results A total of 290 responses were received (133 Europe; 157 Canada; 73% female, median age 12). Over half of respondents (53%) in Europe reported travelling over an hour to in-person appointments with their paediatric rheumatologist, compared to a significantly higher proportion of respondents in Canada (87%). Consequently, in-person appointments represent a greater time burden amongst Canadian caregivers, though both groups report appointments taking over three hours in total (51% Europe, 69% Canada). Prior to COVID-19, most had never had a telemedicine appointment (92% Europe, 95% Canada). Since March 2020, the majority (71% Europe, 82% Canada) had at least one telemedicine appointment. Table 1 shows the scores (1 worst, 5 best) given by parents about their telemedicine experience. Overall, most aspects scored positively (p<.05). However, parents felt telemedicine was not as good as in-person appointments. Key learning points/Conclusion Overall respondents said they would prefer the next appointment to be in-person (82% Europe, 62% Canada, p<.05), although 31% from Canada were amenable to a combination of in-person and telemedicine-based care. There are advantages to telemedicine, notably saving time and making appointments accessible. Families from Canada tended to view telemedicine more favourably than those from Europe, although the majority from both cohorts reported concerns about the ability to assess their child. There may be value in providing training to parents to enhance the accuracy of home-based assessments, particularly when the disease is stable. However, parents continue to report the value of in-person appointments.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".