Examining perceptions of a telemedicine network for pediatric emergency medicine: a mixed-methods pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Use of telemedicine for healthcare delivery in the emergency department can increase access to specialized care for pediatric patients without direct access to a children's hospital. Currently, telemedicine is underused in this setting. Objectives: This pilot research project aimed to evaluate the perceived effectiveness of a telemedicine program in delivering care to critically ill pediatric patients in the emergency department by exploring the experiences of parents/caregivers and physicians. Methods: Sequential explanatory mixed methods were employed, in which quantitative methods of inquiry were followed by qualitative methods. Data were collected through a post-used survey for physicians, followed by semi-structured interviews with physicians and parents/guardians of children treated through the program. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the survey data. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyze interview data. Results: The findings describe positive perceptions of telemedicine for emergency department pediatric care, as well as barriers and facilitators to its use. The research also discusses implications for practice and recommendations for overcoming barriers and supporting facilitators when implementing telemedicine programming. Conclusion: The findings suggest that a telemedicine program has utility and acceptance among parents/caregivers and physicians for the treatment of critically ill pediatric patients in the emergency department. Benefits recognized and valued by both parents/caregivers and physicians include rapid connection to sub-specialized care and enhanced communication between remote and local physicians. Sample size and response rate are key limitations of the study.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".