Satisfaction with pediatric telehealth according to the opinions of children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic: A literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To review satisfaction with telehealth among children and adolescents based on their own opinions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: In the PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Embase databases, we searched for peer-reviewed studies in English on satisfaction with telehealth among children and adolescents (rather than parents). Both observational studies and interventions were eligible. The review was categorized as a mini review because it focused on the limited time frame of the COVID-19 pandemic. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Reviewers extracted information from each study and assessed risk of bias. Results: A total of 14 studies were eligible. Studies were conducted in Australia, Canada, Italy, Israel, Poland, South Korea, the United Kingdom, and the United States. They focused on a variety of health conditions. Two of the 14 studies were interventions. Participants expressed high satisfaction with video and telephone visits and home telemonitoring while also preferring a combination of in-person visits and telehealth services. Factors associated with higher satisfaction with telehealth included greater distance from the medical center, older age, and lower anxiety when using telehealth. In qualitative studies, preferred telehealth features among participants included: a stable Internet connection and anonymity and privacy during telehealth visits. Conclusion: Telehealth services received favorable satisfaction ratings by children and adolescents. Randomized-controlled trials on the effectiveness of pediatric telehealth services compared to non-telehealth services may assess improvements in satisfaction and health outcomes.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".